- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2013 10:44:21 +0200
- To: Dave Lewis <dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie>
- CC: public-multilingualweb-lt-comments@w3.org
- Message-ID: <515BEBE5.5030009@w3.org>
Hi Dave, all, Am 03.04.13 00:58, schrieb Dave Lewis: > Hi Felix, > Comments below: > On 02/04/2013 17:42, Felix Sasaki wrote: >> Hi Dave, all, >> >> the keywords are in upper case and are always linked to the rfc 2119 >> reference, so I would propose not to change the text passages. We >> could make that casing and linking clearer at >> http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#notation >> Also to save some time. What do you think? >> > > That sounds fine to me. So I can confirm to Richard in repsonse to his > original query that only use of keyword with rfc2119 linkage are > considered normative. I think you don't have to get back to Richard about this one - I already did at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Mar/0035.html that should be sufficient. Some comments about the 'musts' and 'shoulds' below. Wrt 'recommended', I would not add linkage. > > However, it would be good to check also whether the following use of > the keyword in normative sections actually need to be in bold with the > linkage. > > cheers, > Dave > > >> >>> While doing this I also found the following occurances of unadorned >>> rfc2119 keywords (underlined below) that seemed to be used in a >>> normative way in normative sections. Editorially, should these be >>> made rfc2119 annotated 'MUST' etc? >>> >>> Also, section 6 (using ITS markup in HTML) and 7 (Using ITS Markup >>> in XHTML) are marked as neither normative or informative (I presume >>> it is the former). >>> >>> >>> 3.1 Notation >>> >>> It is _recommended_ that XML implementations of this specification >>> use this prefix, unless there is existing dedicated markup in use >>> for a given data category. >>> >>> >>> 5.3.2.1 Absolute selector >>> >>> The absolute selectorMUST >>> <http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#rfc-keywords>be >>> an XPath expression which starts with "|/|". That is, it _must_ >>> Wouldn't change to MUST since we don't check this - it is the XPath library that does. >>> be anAbsoluteLocationPath >>> <http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath/#NT-AbsoluteLocationPath>or union >>> ofAbsoluteLocationPath >>> <http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath/#NT-AbsoluteLocationPath>s as described >>> inXPath 1.0 >>> <http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#xpath>. >>> >>> >>> 5.3.5 Variables in selectors >>> >>> >>> The|param|element has a _required _name attribute. >>> >>> >>> 5.4 Link to External Rules >>> >>> One way to associate a document with a set of external ITS rules is >>> to use the optional XLink[XLink 1.1] >>> <http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#xlink1>|href|attribute >>> in the|rules|element. The referenced document _must_ be a valid XML >>> document containing at most one|rules|element. >>> Wouldn't change to must since we don't validate the document. We can't, since we don't know the schema of the linked doc. >>> >>> 5.8 ITS Tools Annotation >>> >>> has three unadorned '_shoulds_' Same here, we can't really check things like "The annotatorsRef attribute should identify the tool most useful in further processes, in this case the MT engine." >>> >>> 8.3.1 Definition >>> >>> Two types of informative notes are needed: >>> >>> * >>> >>> An alert contains information that the translator _must_ read >>> before translating a piece of text. >>> Would not change this to MUST since we can't check this really. So in summary I wouldn't change these since, see also the issue-112 about localization quality types and the related edits at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Mar/0200.html Best, Felix >>> * >>> >>> >>> 8.17.1 Definition >>> >>> '_recommended_' in notes colum for profile refernece attribute >>> >>> >>> cheers, >>> Dave >>> >>> >> >
Received on Wednesday, 3 April 2013 08:44:47 UTC