- From: Arle Lommel <arle.lommel@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2012 17:57:38 +0200
- To: Dave Lewis <dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie>
- Cc: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
Dave, Where did you see this? I didn't get whatever message it was in, so I'm hoping it was sent directly to you and that my mail isn't eating things. (As it happens Des sent me a separate note on this, so I was aware of it, but as I read what you responded to, I saw that it wasn't the same text. -Arle Sic scripsit Dave Lewis in Apr 16, 2012 ad 18:01 : > Hi Des, guys, > I started a new topic on this, since I nearly missed this appended to the other thread. In general could everyone try and keep message content within the subject line topic, it makes tracking and filtering much easier. > > I'd say this is a reasonable candidate for a category. it may be something we can include under the 'legal' category, since what you are really expressing (I think) is a prohibition on that source string and knowledge of its sources and context being available outside a known circle of organizations. > > I certainly see issues trying to classify certain MT providers as 'public' while assuming other MT providers wouldn't share source meta-data - so a usage permission based data category that can be checked against terms and conditions might be the best approach? What do you think? > > cheers, > Dave > > > > On 05/04/2012 17:00, Des Oates wrote: >> I also have another candidate for this data category: >> >> 'Confidentiality' >> >> This is used to disambiguate content that should not be sent to public MT services such as Google Translate or Bing due to the confidential nature of the content. Rather the content should be routed to internal MT engines, or not MT'd at all. In it's simplest form it would be a simple true/false Boolean but it could also be defined as a scalar >> >> Do you think this would be a valid candidate to add to this category? >> >> Thanks >> Des > >
Received on Monday, 16 April 2012 15:58:10 UTC