- From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 16:11:28 +0100
- To: "'Lieske, Christian'" <christian.lieske@sap.com>, <public-i18n-its@w3.org>
Hi Christian, I think what you suggest will probably work. Thanks, RI ============ Richard Ishida Internationalization Lead W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) http://www.w3.org/People/Ishida/ http://www.w3.org/International/ http://people.w3.org/rishida/blog/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/ishida/ > -----Original Message----- > From: Lieske, Christian [mailto:christian.lieske@sap.com] > Sent: 24 March 2006 16:23 > To: Richard Ishida; public-i18n-its@w3.org > Subject: RE: Proposed text for ITS spec introductory material > > Hi Richard, > > We discussed this during today's editor's call. There was > consensus that the spec. would benefit from the additional > explanations you are suggesting. We have come up with the > following ideas of how to accomodate your suggestions: > > A. We will intergrate the additional paragraph you are > suggesting for section 1. > > B. We will take your proposed sections 2.1 and 2.2 and place > it at the beginning of our "Introduction". > This would give us an new outline for the introduction > along the following lines > > 1 Introduction > 1.1 Users and Usages of ITS > 1.2 Motivation for ITS > 1.3 Out of Scope > 1.4 Important Design Principles > 1.5 Development of this Specification > > C. We will take your proposed sections 2.3 - 2.7 and add it > to our "Basic Concepts". > > Of course, I will not be possible to take over your material "as is" > since for example recent disussions in the group have > outdated some of it (like the bit about "schemaRule"). > > It would be great if you could let us know if this proposal > looks alright to you. I could then start working on the > actual integration. > > Best regards, > Christian > -----Original Message----- > From: public-i18n-its-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-i18n-its-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Richard Ishida > Sent: Freitag, 24. Februar 2006 19:37 > To: public-i18n-its@w3.org > Subject: Proposed text for ITS spec introductory material > > > Chaps, > > I began reading the latest version of the ITS spec in > preparation for next week. I have scribbled a number of > editorial comments on my paper copy, but I felt like a couple > of the introductory sections needed more than that. I also > figured that it would be almost as easy for me to write > alternative text as to clarify what I'm thinking so that > someone else could evaluate and/or implement it. So I wrote > what follows. It is only a first pass, so there may be > things that can be improved. > > > SECTION 1.1 > > > Section 1.1 still talks only about localization and still > ignores international use of schemas. I propose the > following replacement text for the first two paragraphs: > > [[ > Content or software that is authored in one language (i.e. source > language) is often made available in additional languages. > This is done through a process called localization, where the > original material is translated and adapted to the target audience. > > In addition, document formats expressed by schemas may be > used by people in different parts of the world, and these > people may need special markup to support the local language > or script. For example, people authoring in languages such > as Arabic, Hebrew, Persian or Urdu need special markup to > demarcate directionality in mixed direction text. > > >From the viewpoints of feasibility, cost, and efficiency, it is > important that the original material should be suitable for > localization and international use. This is achieved by > appropriate design and development, and the corresponding > process is referred to as internationalization. For a > detailed explanation of the terms "localization" and > "internationalization", see [l10n i18n]. > ]] > > > > > SECTION 2 > > > Section 2, Basic Concepts, still hits me as a description of > ITS from the engineer's point of view, rather than describing > the how it intersects with the potential user's interests. > (It's like having documentation for Powerpoint that just went > through the pull-down menus in order, rather than having > sections such as 'How to create a new presentation', 'How to > work with the master', etc.) After reading this section I > find I still have to work hard at reassembling the > information in my brain in terms of what I knew when I > started and where I am now, and in terms of where we're going > with this. > > Here is a proposal for an alternative approach. > > > [[ > > 2 Basic Concepts > > 2.1 Potential users of ITS > > The ITS specification aims to provide schema developers with > information about what markup should be supported to enable > worldwide use of their schemas and effective localization of > the content developed using that schema. This information is > provided in an abstract way in the data category > descriptions, but specific proposals for implementation are > also made in the specification. > > One group of people who will use this information will be > developing new schemas from the ground up. In the > specification they will find proposals for attribute and > element names to be included in their new schema. Using the > same names as proposed here may be helpful because it leads > to easier recognition of the concepts represented by both > authors and localization tool developers. It is perfectly > possible, however, for the schema developer to develop their > own set of tag and element names. The specification sets > out, first and foremost, to ensure the required markup is > available, and that the behaviour of that markup meets > established needs. > > Another group of users of this specification will be working > with existing schemas, such as DocBook, DITA, or perhaps an > in-house schema. > > The ITS Working Group has sought input from people developing > widely used formats such as DocBook and DITA, and > specification provides examples of how we feel those specific > formats could be adapted to support ITS. > > Developers working on existing schemas should check whether > their schemas support the markup proposed in this > specification, and, where appropriate, add the markup > proposed here to their schema. > > In some cases, the schema may already contain markup > equivalent to that recommended in ITS. In this case it is > not necessary to add duplicate markup. The developer should, > however, check that the behaviour associated with the markup > in their own schema is fully compatible with the expectations > described in this specification. > > Other users of the ITS specification will be translation tool > developers. When content is sent for translation, it is > important to ensure that such tools recognize what to do with > the various bits of content described by the markup. For > example, translation tools should prevent content marked up > as not for translation from being changed. It is hoped that > the ITS specification will make the job of these developers > easier by standardising the expected behaviour of certain > relevant markup items, and allowing them to more effectively > identify how content should be handled. > > The markup proposed in this specification may also be used by > content authors to mark up specific bits of content. > However, we will describe below how the burden of inserting > markup can sometimes be removed from content authors and the > data categories can be related to relevant bits of content in > a more global manner. This work may fall to information > architects, rather than the content authors themselves. > > > > 2.2 Ways to implement ITS > > The ITS specification provides a set of element and attribute > names that can be included in a schema, but it also goes > beyond that to specify a mechanism for describing various > aspects of a schema in terms of translatability and > internationalization. > > We will explore the possible approaches below. For the > purpose of illustration, we will use examples of ways to > indicate that certain parts of content should or should not > be translated. There are three ways of indicating this information: > > 1. a content author uses an attribute on a particular element > in the content to say that the text should not be translated > > 2. a document developer uses markup at the top of the > document to identify a particular type of element or context > in which the content should not be translated > > 3. a schema developer uses constructs in the schema itself to > indicate that specific parts of the content should not be translated. > > The first two approaches above can be likened to the use of > CSS in XHTML. Using a style attribute, an XHTML content > author may assign a colour to a particular paragraph. That > author could also have used the style element at the top of > the page to say that all paragraphs of a particular class or > in a particular context would be coloured red. > > > > 2.3 Using local markup > > Example 4 shows how a content author may use an ITS attribute > to indicate what text should be translated and what text > should be protected from translation. Translation tools that > are aware of the meaning of this attribute can then screen > the relevant content from the translation process. > > Example 4 goes here [Note the relevant parts of these > examples should be bolded for easy identification using a tag > such as strong for WAI accessibility] > > For this to work, the schema developer will need to add the > its:translate attribute to the schema as a common attribute > or on all the relevant element definitions. > > Note how there is an expectation in this case that > inheritance play a part in identifying which content is to be > translated and which not. > Tools that process this content for translation will need to > manage the scoping. > > > > 2.4 Using documentRule directives > > Example 5 shows a different approach to identifying > non-translatable content, similar to that used with a style > element in XHTML, but using an ITS-defined element called > its:documentRules. > > Example 5 goes here > > The head of a document can contain an its:documentRules > element, which contains one or more documentRule elements. In > addition to one or more ITS data category attributes, the > documentRule element contains a corresponding set of ITS > selector attributes (in the example translateSelector). As > their name suggests, they select (or designate) the XML node > or nodes to which a corresponding ITS data category attribute > pertains. The values of ITS selector attributes are XPath > absolute location paths. Information for the handling of > namespaces in these path expressions is contained in the ITS > element ns which is a child of documentRules. > > This approach has the following benefits: > > - Content authors do not have to concern themselves with creating > additional markup or verifying that the markup was applied correctly. > ITS data categories are associated with sets of XML nodes > (for example all p elements in an XML instance) > > - Changing the rules can be done in a single location, rather than > by searching and modifying the markup throughout a document > (or documents, if the documentRules element is stored as an > external entity) > > - ITS data categories can designate attribute values as well as > elements. > > - It is possible to map ITS markup to existing markup (for example > the term element in DITA) [Ed. not a clear example unless we > show the ITS equivalent - and I think there is none, so what > about citing the DITA translate attribute?] > > For this to work, the schema developer needs to add the > documentRules and associated markup to the schema. In some > cases this may allow the schema developer to avoid adding > other ITS markup (such as an its:translate attribute) to the > elements in the schema, however, it is likely that authors > will want to use attributes on markup from time to time to > override the general rule. > > For specification of the translate flag, the contents of the > documentRules element would normally be designed by an > information architect familiar with the document format and > familiar with, or working with someone familiar with, the > needs of the localization group. > > > > 2.5 Using schemaRule > > Example 6 shows an alternative approach to designating the > XML node or nodes to which a corresponding ITS data category > attribute pertains. > This time putting the information directly into the schema > itself, using its:schemaRule. Note that this is only > possible for schemas developed using W3C XML Schema ... > > Example 6 goes here > > This example defines all term elements to be non-translatable > by default. > > [More text about how this works and who would do it] > > > > 2.6 Overwriting/precedence and inheritance > > The power of ITS selector attributes comes at a price: rules > related to overwriting/precedence, and inheritance, have to > be established. > > Example 7 goes here > > In this example, the ITS data category attribute translate appears > twice: in a documentRule , and on a specific p element. > Since the ITS selector attribute in the documentRule > selects all p elements, the question arises what the value > for the translate data category of the p element which has > local markup is. ITS provides precedence and inheritance > rules which answer questions like this. In the example, the > value is "no" (that is the content of the p element should > not be translated). > > > > 2.7 Using ITS elements > > The above example of a translate flag applied an ITS data > category to an attribute node. Many of the ITS data > categories can be expressed using attribute nodes, but not > all. Some are expressed using element nodes. > Here is an example of such an approach. > > .... > ]] > > > > > Hope that helps, and that I have understood the mechanism correctly. > > RI > > > > ============ > Richard Ishida > Internationalization Lead > W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) > > http://www.w3.org/People/Ishida/ > http://www.w3.org/International/ > http://people.w3.org/rishida/blog/ > http://www.flickr.com/photos/ishida/ > >
Received on Wednesday, 29 March 2006 15:11:35 UTC