RE: issue-60 (Re: Comment on ITS 2.0 specification WD)

Felix,

The question here is to agree whether values like "uncategorized"  or
"other" cover the "unintelligible" one. 

Here, we can discuss the point of the note: "This value is to be used as a
fall-back only in cases where a more specific issue type (including /other/)
cannot be identified." 

According to me:

- "Uncategorized" is a concrete quality issue, but not listed and neither
unintelligible.
- "Other" means all the rest, including unintelligible, but we could make
the distinction and adding this if it is important for QT Launchpad project.

Just my two cents.
Pedro

----Mensaje original-----
De: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org] 
Enviado el: martes, 11 de diciembre de 2012 16:43
Para: public-multilingualweb-lt-comments@w3.org
Asunto: Re: issue-60 (Re: Comment on ITS 2.0 specification WD)

Hi Arle, all,

sure. But there is another aspect of the change, see the bottom of

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2012D
ec/0004.html

"Is there some planned or existing tools support for this new value? 
What  do other implementors think about the proposal?"

This is independent of the "substantive versus editoral change" 
discussion, but still important IMO.

Best,

Felix

Am 11.12.12 15:49, schrieb Arle Lommel:
> I would agree with Jirka in this case. No existing implementation would be
affected by this, as far as I can tell. But we can discuss it.
>
> -Arle
>
>> Hi Felix,
>>
>> is this really case which needs additional LC? Adding new value in a 
>> rather long enumeration is backward compatible with existing ITS 
>> markup and seems as a quite minor change for me.
>

Received on Tuesday, 11 December 2012 16:09:54 UTC