- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2006 08:55:26 +0900
- To: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@translate.com>
- Cc: public-i18n-its@w3.org
- Message-ID: <442DC16E.5070004@w3.org>
Hi Yves, You mentioned at the editor's call the difference of inheritance in DITA / XLIFF versus ITS. I had a short look at http://www-306.ibm.com/software/globalization/topics/dita/transdtd.jsp and my impression is that it is the role of defaults from the general DITA DTD or a a specialized one is which you were mentioning. Do you have the impression that ITS does s.t. different than DITA / XLIFF, or is it just s.t. "additional"? If the later is the case, we don't need to restructure our inheritance / default descriptions, but just add s.t. for translatability, e.g. 1. Implicit local selection in instance documents (data category attributes on a specific element) 2. Local selections in instance documents (using a documentRules element) 3. Global selections in an external file (using a documentRules element) 4. Selections via defaults for data categories, see Section 6.1: Position and Default Selections of Data Categories and for translatability: if a specification of defaults is present (we would have to define a format for that), it has precedence other 4. If you agree, this would be a bug "extending precedence to be able to cater defaults". Otherwise, it would be "rethinking ITS" ... Cheers, Felix
Received on Friday, 31 March 2006 23:55:42 UTC