issue-61 (Re: Comment on ITS 2.0 specification WD)

Hi Naoto, all,

thanks a lot for these. I have an action-367 to follow up on this, so 
that Christian can work on sec. 1-2. I hope to get to this by Thursday EOB.

Best,

Felix

Am 11.12.12 14:22, schrieb Naoto Nishio:
>
>
> Refer to the comments at the bottom, please.
>
> Is 'e.g.' or e.g.,' correct?
>
> Kind regards,
> Naoto
>
> 1 Introduction
>
> /This section is informative./
>
> The ITS 2.0 specification both[NN1] <#_msocom_1> identifies concepts 
> (such as “Translate”) that are important for internationalization and 
> localization, and defines implementations of these concepts (termed 
> “ITS data categories”) as a set of elements and attributes called the 
> /Internationalization Tag Set (ITS)/.
>
> **
>
>
>       1.2 Motivation for ITS
>
> *…*
>
> From the viewpoints of feasibility, cost, and efficiency, it is 
> important that the original material should be suitable for 
> localization. This is achieved by appropriate design and development, 
> and the corresponding process is referred to as 
> internationalization[NN2] <#_msocom_2> . For a detailed explanation of 
> the terms “localization” and “internationalization”, see[l10n i18n] 
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#geo-i18n-l10n>.
>
>
>       1.3 Users and Usages of ITS
>
>
>         Description: o to the table of contents.
>         <http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#contents>1.3.1
>         Potential Users of ITS
>
> …
>
> The following paragraphs sketch these different types of users, and 
> their usage of ITS. In order to support all of these users, the 
> information about what markup should be supported to enable worldwide 
> use and effective localization [NN3] <#_msocom_3> of content is 
> provided in this specification in two ways:
>
> **
>
>
>       1.3.1.5Machine Translation Systems
>
> …
>
> These processes include basic tasks, like [NN4] <#_msocom_4> parsing 
> constraints and markup, and compositional tasks, such as 
> disambiguation. These tasks consume and generate valuable metadata 
> from and for third party users, for example, provenance information 
> and quality scoring, and add relevant information for follow-on tasks, 
> processes and services, such as MT post-editing, MT training and MT 
> terminological enhancement.
>
> **
>
>
>       1.3.1.7Localization Workflow Managers
>
> This type of users is concerend with localization workflows in which 
> content goes through certain steps: preparation for localization, 
> start of the localization process by e.g. a conversion into a bitext 
> formatlike[cs5] <#_msocom_5> [XLIFF] 
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#xliff>, the actual 
> localization by human translators or machine translation [NN6] 
> <#_msocom_6> and other adaptations of content, and finally the 
> integration of the localized content into the original format.That 
> format is often based on XML or HTML; (Web) content management systems 
> are widely used for content creation, and their integration with 
> localization workflows is an important task for the workflow manager. 
> For the integration of content creation and localization, metadata 
> plays a crucial role. E.g.[NN7] <#_msocom_7> an ITS data category 
> like[NN8] <#_msocom_8> translate 
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#trans-datacat>can 
> trigger the extraction of localizable text. "/Metadata 
> roundtripping/", that is the availibility [NN9] <#_msocom_9> of 
> metadata both before and after the localization process[NN10] 
> <#_msocom_10> is crucial for many tasks of the localization workflow 
> manager. An example is metadata based quality control, with checks 
> like "/Have all pieces of content set to///|/translate="no"/|///been 
> left unchanged?/". [NN11] <#_msocom_11> Other pieces of metadata are 
> relevant for proper internationalization during the localization 
> workflow, e.g. the availibility ofDirectionality 
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#directionality>markup 
> for adequate visualization of bidirectional text.
>
>
>         Description: o to the table of contents.
>         <http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#contents>
>
>
>       1.6 Important Design Principles
>
> …
>
> Localization managers, on the other hand, need an efficient way to 
> manage translations of large document sets based on the same schema. 
> These needs could by realized [cs12] <#_msocom_12> by a specification 
> of defaults for the Translate 
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#trans-datacat> data 
> category along with exceptions to those defaults (e.g. all p elements 
> should be translated, but not p elements inside of an index element).
>
>
>       2.1.2 Global Approach
>
> The document inExample 11 
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#EX-basic-concepts-2>shows a 
> different approach to identifying non-translatable content, similar to 
> that used with a|style|element in[XHTML 1.0] 
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#xhtml10>, but using an 
> ITS-defined element called|rules|. It works as follows: A document can 
> contain a|rules|element (placed where it does not impact the structure 
> of the document, e.g., in a “head” section). It contains one or more 
> ITS rule elements (for example[NN13] <#_msocom_13> |translateRule|). 
> Each of these specific elements contains a|selector|attribute. As its 
> name suggests, this attribute selects the node or nodes to which a 
> corresponding ITS information pertains. The values of ITS selector 
> attributes are XPath absolute location paths (or CSS selectors 
> ifqueryLanguage 
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#queryLanguage>is set to 
> "css"). Information for the handling of namespaces in these path 
> expressions is taken from namespace declarations[XML Names] 
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#xmlns>at the current 
> rule element.
>
>
>       2.1.2 Global Approach
>
>
>       …
>
> For specification of theTranslate 
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#trans-datacat>data 
> category information, the contents of the|rules|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.[NN14] <#_msocom_14>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> [NN1] <#_msoanchor_1>Should ‘both’ be there?
>
> [NN2] <#_msoanchor_2>Should it be in bold font since localization is 
> in bold font in the paragraph above.
>
> [NN3] <#_msoanchor_3>Should it be ‘Internationalization and localization’?
>
> [NN4] <#_msoanchor_4>Such as?
>
> [cs5] <#_msoanchor_5>Such as?
>
> [NN6] <#_msoanchor_6>Machine translation systems
>
> [NN7] <#_msoanchor_7>Can ‘e.g..’ be used here? May it be ‘For 
> example’, or , e.g. ?
>
> [NN8] <#_msoanchor_8>Such as?
>
> [NN9] <#_msoanchor_9>availablity
>
> [NN10] <#_msoanchor_10>Insert a comma.
>
> [NN11] <#_msoanchor_11>It may need reviewing.
>
> [cs12] <#_msoanchor_12>be realised
>
> [NN13] <#_msoanchor_13>It may use e.g., ?
>
> [NN14] <#_msoanchor_14>Perhaps it may be ‘ …by an information 
> architect familiar with, or working with someone familiar with the 
> document format and the needs of the localization group ‘.
>