- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 18:33:46 +0200
- To: Phil Ritchie <philr@vistatec.ie>
- Cc: Arle Lommel <arle.lommel@dfki.de>, Multilingual Web LT Public List <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>, Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>
- Message-ID: <CAL58czoSYg=e+U=pK7D4ws_-fCmoMGwLhgVuBHbG6Sa4afeHCg@mail.gmail.com>
Cool - so we can get rid of the "internal" syntax :) Arle, do you want to revise your example along these lines? Felix 2012/8/1 Phil Ritchie <philr@vistatec.ie> > Ah, of course, <span /> should work. > > Phil. > > > > > > From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org> > To: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>, > Cc: Arle Lommel <arle.lommel@dfki.de>, Phil Ritchie < > philr@vistatec.ie>, Multilingual Web LT Public List < > public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org> > Date: 01/08/2012 16:15 > Subject: Re: Quality markup sample > ------------------------------ > > > > > > 2012/8/1 Yves Savourel <*ysavourel@enlaso.com* <ysavourel@enlaso.com>> > Wow… That is really pushing toward new frontiers :) N*2 levels of > information into a single value is bound to break at some point: you can’t > use any of the delimiters as literal for example. > > > > I would think that if you need to apply several note to the same content > you would use several <span> elements. It’s not nice, but it’s more common > than doing that kind of cramming. > > > > But overall it seems we are really trying to put inline something that is > just not working well inline. > > > I agree, and my proposal just came because the inline requirement seemed > to be mandatory. But maybe we can drop it, or use the "span" solution, ... > Phil? > > Felix > > > > Cheers, > > -ys > > > > > > *From:* Arle Lommel [mailto:*arle.lommel@dfki.de* <arle.lommel@dfki.de>] * > Sent:* Wednesday, August 01, 2012 4:50 PM* > To:* Phil Ritchie > > * > Cc:* Multilingual Web LT Public List* > Subject:* Re: Quality markup sample > > > > Hi Phil, > > > > After discussing with Felix, I think we have a solution to the issue of > multiple markup items: We would have an internal syntax to the attribute > values using a vertical bar (|) as a delimiter, so you could see markup > like this: > > > > <p > > its-qualitytype="markup;okapi:MISSING_TAG_IN_TARGET| > terminology;okapi:TERMINOLOGY" > > its-qualitycomment="An <em> tag is missing in the target|the text > should refer to a USB drive rather than pen drive"> > > The only thing you need is a pen drive > > </p> > > > > In this case the ; in qualityType would delimit between the high-level > category and the application-specific one and the | between instances of > values, so the blue values are a pair, and the red ones another. The > requirement then (which I don't think can be enforced by a schema) is that > if you have bar-delimited bits in one qualityType, you need an equal number > in qualityComment (and vice versa), even if they are empty. For example, > the following would be perfectly acceptable > > > > <p > > its-qualitytype="markup;okapi:MISSING_TAG_IN_TARGET| > terminology;okapi:TERMINOLOGY" > > its-qualitycomment="|the text should refer to a USB drive rather than pen > drive"> > > The only thing you need is a pen drive > > </p> > > > > I.e., the qualityComment value corresponding to the red portion is empty > and the bar marks the end of the empty portion. > > > > I know this is cramming some structure into the values of these attributes > that complicates them, but given the overriding and inheritance rules of > ITS, this seems to be the best solution. > > > > Best, > > > > Arle > > > > On Jul 31, 2012, at 20:44 , Phil Ritchie <*philr@vistatec.ie*<philr@vistatec.ie>> > wrote: > > > Thanks for this Arle. Good catch on the multiple errors. I'm not > familiar with how additive markup is achieved. Sounds like you have to end > up with some sort of external file that has multiple pointers to the same > element? > > Phil > > > > > > > > > -- > Felix Sasaki > DFKI / W3C Fellow > > > ************************************************************ > This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and > intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they > are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify > the sender immediately by e-mail. > > www.vistatec.com > ************************************************************ > > -- Felix Sasaki DFKI / W3C Fellow
Received on Wednesday, 1 August 2012 16:34:11 UTC