W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org > August 2012

RE: [ISSUE-34]: Revised description and example

From: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 04:47:41 -0600
To: "'Arle Lommel'" <arle.lommel@dfki.de>, "'MultilingualWeb-LT Working Group'" <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
Message-ID: <assp.0565fcdcfb.assp.056570a295.005901cd73c0$e7388b10$b5a9a130$@com>
Hi Arle, all,

Thanks for the attribute table.
I have a couple of notes:

-- 1) its-translation-quality-stage

> A value to indicate the status of a particular issue 
> in a review workflow Picklist, consisting of:
> translated|
> reviewed|
> rebuttal|
> agreed
> The precise meaning of these values remains to be defined

I don't think we should have a workflow-type indicator. It's just too tool-specific to define.

Instead I think there is a strong need for an attribute that indicates if the given quality-issue item is off or off (active/inactive). This is important for flagging false positives as well as simply working incrementally on the document. At first all entries are on, then false positives as well as the entries that are deemed 'ok' by the user can be turned off, then the tool can re-run the checks on the same corrected document and know not to re-issue things that have been dealt with.

That's I think, the only workflow-related information we need.

-- 2) names

Isn't "translation-quality" a bit restrictive for the names?

There are many cases where the issue is not really about translation. Bad spelling in the source text could be used in many situations, so are information about length issues, etc.

At the least it should be "localization-quality" (or loc-quality to follow the locNote pattern in 1.0).

Received on Monday, 6 August 2012 10:48:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:31:50 UTC