W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-its@w3.org > July to September 2006

Re: AW: Missing term="yes|no" attribute for <termRule>

From: Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 17:55:11 +0900
Message-Id: <6.0.0.20.2.20060823171534.07686960@localhost>
To: "Lieske, Christian" <christian.lieske@sap.com>, <public-i18n-its@w3.org>
Cc: "Yves Savourel" <ysavourel@translate.com>

I agree with Yves. Cases like xml:lang (where it took us
some years to realize that we needed something like xml:lang=""
to express the lack of information) show that it is very important
to make such labeling systems as 'complete' as possible. This means
that there should always be an explicit label for the default.
As another, similar example, in CSS now every property can take
a value of 'inherit'. This wasn't always the case, it took time
to realize that this was helpful in some cases.

Relying e.g. on a separate rules file is a bad idea. It may
work in some cases, but it's a bad idea for the technology to
rely on it, because this reduces orthogonality.

Regards,    Martin.


At 17:03 06/08/22, Lieske, Christian wrote:
>
>Hi Yves,
>
>I guess you may need this "overriding" in situations like the following:
>
>===
>You are would like to work with an external rules file. Unfortunately, the
>"termRule" in that file does not suit your needs. Thus, you want to get
>rid of it/cancel it.
>===
>
>I wonder if we really should provide an explicit cancellation mechanism and
>shouldn't just tell people that in cases like this, the need to create a
>separate "itsRules".
>
>Cheers,
>Christian
>-----Urspr$BO(Bgliche Nachricht-----
>Von: public-i18n-its-request@w3.org [mailto:public-i18n-its-request@w3.org] 
>Im Auftrag von Yves Savourel
>Gesendet: Monday, August 21, 2006 5:50 PM
>An: public-i18n-its@w3.org
>Betreff: Missing term="yes|no" attribute for <termRule>
>
>
>Hi everyone,
>
>I've noticed a possible over-simplification in <termRule>:
>
>At some point after the WD of February we decided to remove the 
>term="yes|no" attribute in the global terminology rule, thinking it
>was not needed because it was always used as term="yes".
>
>I think it was a mistake: One should be able to override a previous rule 
>that says a given element is a term. Or am I missing
>something?
>
>So, I would propose to re-instate the term="yes|no" in <termRule>.
>
>I've entered a corresponding new bug in our issues list:
>http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3612
>
>
>Cheers,
>-yves


#-#-#  Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
#-#-#  http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp       mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp     
Received on Wednesday, 23 August 2006 09:14:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:04:11 UTC