RE: New ITS syntax

Thanks Felix,

> This is a RELAX NG schema and a DTD below 
> on the new syntax of ITS.

Just a minor point before going through the comments:
Felix meant to say: This is the "potential new syntax" (since we have not voted on it yet).



> #About locInfoRule: At the locInfoRule element, there must 
> be either an locInfo attribute or an locInfoRef attribute. 
> If none is present, there must be an locInfoMap attribute. 
> It is an error if there is a locInfoMap attribute and in 
> addition a locInfo or locInfoRef attribute.
> There is an optional locInfoType attribute.

I would say: "There must be either a a locInfo element [not attribute] or a locInfoRef attribute. If neither is present, there must
be either a locInfoMap attribute or a locInfoRefMap attribute."

I'm proposing to add locInfoRefMap for completion of that new way of pointing to the locInfo rather than directly setting the note.
I would be strange otherwise to offer mapping for one but not the other (and that we do have a termRefMap).



> #About langRule: The element langRule is used to express 
> that a given piece of content (selected by the attribute 
> langMap) is used to express language information as defined 
> by RFC 3066 or its successor. ...
> Example: ...
> The value is given by the @mylangattribute attached to 
> the p elements.

What about the cascading/inheritence mechanism of xml:lang? Does ITS assumes the mapped markup offers also such mechanism? If so,
how does it works if the mapped markup is an element? I guess I'm trying to make sure we do address (or choose not to address) the
whole semantics of xml:lang with langMap. Either way it needs to be clearly specified.



> #About rubyRule: The element rubyRule is used 
> {1) to map existing ruby markup to ITS ruby, 
> which itself is defind in terms of the W3C 
> ruby specification, or (2) to add ruby text 
> to attribute values. ...
> It is an error if both an its:rubyText 
> attribute and an its:rubyTextMap attribute 
> occur at the same <its:rubyRule> element.

What about <rp> and complex ruby?


-yves

Received on Monday, 13 March 2006 18:05:47 UTC