> In ITS 1.0 we were very careful not to allow implementations > to say "I implement the localization note data category > globally, and I implement only locNote and locNote ref, but > not locNotePointer or locNoteRefPointer. This is very helpful > for interoperability. If application A (or a human) creates > localization note metadata and sends it to implementation B > that claims "I implement the localization note data category > globally", application A can be sure that all localization > note metadata will be processed by application B. > ... > So the main question is if we agree on above approach? +1 > Now, coming back to quality ... > ... > loc-quality-score: mandatory, value is 0-100 or "unknown" > loc-quality-severity: mandatory, value is "unknown" or what Arle > had in the table "permissive values" Mmm... defaulting to "unknown" for numeric value will cause some minor headaches for some implementations that would store the parsed value as a numeric. I guess they can convert to -1. Another note for score and severity: why do we have one between 0 and 100 and the other between 0.00 and 1.00. It's exactly the same thing just using a different notation. Couldn't we go for 0-100 for both: that way implementation could use shorts to store the values, rather than the more clumsy floats? -ysReceived on Tuesday, 7 August 2012 10:53:32 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:31:50 UTC