- From: Lieske, Christian <christian.lieske@sap.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:40:37 +0100
- To: "public-multilingualweb-lt-comments@w3.org" <public-multilingualweb-lt-comments@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <8EA44C66E2911C4AB21558F4720695DC60D7CA86FC@DEWDFECCR01.wdf.sap.corp>
Hi, Please find below comments/observations/questions/ideas concerning the ITS 2.0 working draft dated December 6, 2012 (http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/). Please feel free to contact me for clarifications if anything is unclear. Although Section 1.1 (Relation to ITS 1.0 and New Principles) only is an "informative" one, it seems important to me. It is about the first bit of content that a reader of the Working Draft (WD) gets to see. Thus, many readers presumably expect to find an overview/orientation. Thus, the section may benefit for example from mentioning additional high-level differences/changes between ITS 1.0 and ITS 2.0. Here's a more complete list of differences/changes that I could imagine to be covered in the section: 1. list of additional data categories (that's already in the current draft) 2. modified data categories (e.g. "termConfidence" for term, or the model for Ruby) 3. query language on rules element 4. parameters/variables in selectors 5. modified selectors (absolute and relative) 6. toolsRef to record which tools generated data category related information 7. changes to conformance section (e.g. clause for processing ITS with HTML) 8. conversion to NIF 9. more "implementation hints" (e.g. RDFa Lite) Furthermore, the section could mention some additional background: 10. (implicit) clustering of data categories (as in http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its2req-20120524/#Descriptions_of_proposed_metadata_categories) 11. liasons and coordination (e.g. attention to Unicode registered extensions "u" and "t") 12. focus on real-world use cases (thus for example no "...confidence" for all data categories, since that would hardly be needed) Cheers, Christian
Received on Thursday, 10 January 2013 10:41:04 UTC