- From: Dr. David Filip <David.Filip@ul.ie>
- Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 01:00:57 +0000
- To: Verifika support <support@e-verifika.com>
- Cc: "public-multilingualweb-lt-comments@w3.org" <public-multilingualweb-lt-comments@w3.org>, "public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org" <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
Thanks, Mikhail, the mechanics of the proposed example is explained in the referenced minutes: <Arle> Add second example: The translated text uses different wording for a single regulatory notice in the source that occurs multiple times in a series of manuals. The specific example though still needs to be developed as part of the pending editorial action. Still, because the definition is normative and the example to be added only informative, I take it that you are happy with the new definition of the "inconsistence" value and thus satisfied with the resolution of your comment. Is that right? Thanks dF Dr. David Filip ======================= LRC | CNGL | LT-Web | CSIS University of Limerick, Ireland telephone: +353-6120-2781 cellphone: +353-86-0222-158 facsimile: +353-6120-2734 mailto: david.filip@ul.ie On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Verifika support <support@e-verifika.com> wrote: > Dear David, > > Yes, new category descriptions seems to be enough for our goals. > Unfortunately, I have not found an example (that should be added to the description) to be sure. > Thank you for the attention. > > -- > Kind regards, > > Mikhail Kudinov > VerifikaT Support & Development Team > Palex Languages & Software > Tel: +7 (3822) 53-16-38 | Fax: +7 (3822) 56-27-33 > Russia | Tomsk | GMT +7 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dr. David Filip [mailto:David.Filip@ul.ie] > Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 5:50 PM > To: public-multilingualweb-lt-comments@w3.org; Verifika support > Cc: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org > Subject: Re: [ISSUE-76]: clarification of "inconsistency" quality issue type needed, was: Re: Comment on ITS 2.0 specification WD [Action-392] Make the edit for issue 76 > > Dear Mikhail, > sorry for our long silence regarding your valuable comment. > Your comment has been accpted at the groups F2F meetinmg in Prague on January 23 > http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#item15 > The resolution was to broaden the category description to explicitly cover and provide a second example, see the above link for details. > Unfortunately, the editorial action is still pending. > Would you please let us know for record if the solution as outlined in the minutes above satisfies you? > Thanks again for your contribution and kind regards dF > > Dr. David Filip > ======================= > LRC | CNGL | LT-Web | CSIS > University of Limerick, Ireland > telephone: +353-6120-2781 > cellphone: +353-86-0222-158 > facsimile: +353-6120-2734 > mailto: david.filip@ul.ie > > > On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:21 PM, Dr. David Filip <David.Filip@ul.ie> wrote: >> Dear Mikhail, >> >> your comment has been assigned >> >> ISSUE-76: >> >> clarification of "inconsistency" quality issue type needed. >> >> Your comment has been discussed during regular WG calls and members of >> the group will be using reference to ISSUE-76 providing e-mail >> clarifications regarding your comment. >> >> Thanks again for sending your comment >> dF >> >> >> >> >> Dr. David Filip >> ======================= >> LRC | CNGL | LT-Web | CSIS >> University of Limerick, Ireland >> telephone: +353-6120-2781 >> cellphone: +353-86-0222-158 >> facsimile: +353-6120-2734 >> mailto: david.filip@ul.ie >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Mikhail, >>> >>> since you are not subscribed to the comments list, your mail did not reach the list. You can subscribe to the list via this link: >>> >>> mailto:public-multilingualweb-lt-comments-request@w3.org?subject= >>> subscribe >>> >>> >>> Thanks a lot anyway for the comment. We will discuss it and come back to you asap. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Felix >>> >>> -------- Original-Nachricht -------- >>> Betreff: [Moderator Action] Comment on ITS 2.0 specification WD >>> Datum: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 17:36:32 +0000 >>> Von: Verifika support <support@e-verifika.com> >>> An: public-multilingualweb-lt-comments@w3.org >>> <public-multilingualweb-lt-comments@w3.org> >>> >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> >>> >>> I tried to map all our QA categories to the standard ones. >>> >>> For most of them it was quite obvious, but I am not sure about the inconsistency errors. >>> >>> >>> >>> Our inconsistency check (like a lot of other tools ones) finds different translation for the same source text in one file, across several files or file and translation memory. >>> >>> It seems it should be mapped to category "inconsistency", but the exact description of this category is the following: >>> >>> >>> >>> The text is inconsistent with itself (NB: not for use with terminology inconsistency). >>> >>> >>> >>> Example is also about inconsistency in the same text fragment, but not about different translations of the same text. >>> >>> So, it seems this category should not include our "inconsistency" errors, but may be it is result of short description. >>> >>> Could you clarify the sense of this category? >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> Mikhail Kudinov >>> VerifikaT Support & Development Team >>> Palex Languages & Software >>> Tel: +7 (3822) 53-16-38 | Fax: +7 (3822) 56-27-33 Russia | Tomsk | >>> GMT +7 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>
Received on Thursday, 28 February 2013 01:02:04 UTC