- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 16:25:53 +0200
- To: Phil Ritchie <philr@vistatec.ie>
- Cc: Arle Lommel <arle.lommel@dfki.de>, Multilingual Web LT Public List <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAL58czqwK=xj=9zE50MPtpJ=j8s0q0hF84zuXEzdHOtTUfvNhg@mail.gmail.com>
2012/8/7 Phil Ritchie <philr@vistatec.ie> > I would see a requirement to support multiple annotations per element but > only independent ones. That is, Arle's second example would seem required > as it allows multiple, independent agents to add markup. For the first > example, the parent entity seems redundant. > > Felix, what would prohibit the application of CSS/DOM processing to the > multiple records? > The complexity of writing adequate CSS selectors. How would you write a CSS selector that matches <meta its-loc-quality-profile="XYZ:xyz.com/fake" /> with its-loc-quality-code="XYZ:wrong_name" ? Felix > > Phil. > > > > > > From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org> > To: Arle Lommel <arle.lommel@dfki.de>, > Cc: Multilingual Web LT Public List < > public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org> > Date: 07/08/2012 15:05 > Subject: Re: [ISSUE-34] Problem with mandatory attributes for > quality > ------------------------------ > > > > Hi Arle, all, > > as Yves has pointed out in a separate mail, inline markup has its limits. > But is there a need to have "multiple quality records" inline? No matter > how you represent the multiple records, you won't be able to apply the CSS > styling to it anymore, or any other dom based processing in the browser. > > So I would propose to leave the inline proposal as is, with Yves' > suggestions at > * > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Aug/0107.html > *<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Aug/0107.html> > and leave further discussions to the standoff / reference scenario. The > main point is that we align the metadata available inline and offline, but > having the multiple quality records just offline sounds reasonable to me. > > (Btw., a conversion to NIF might be another solution to the offline > scenario, but I won't go to far here ...) > > Best, > > Felix > > 2012/8/7 Arle Lommel <*arle.lommel@dfki.de* <arle.lommel@dfki.de>> > Going further, I am not sure what it would mean, however, if a > locQualityScore value were declared inside the context of another one. > Under out normal precedence rules it would be as if the "outer" one did not > exist, but it could be that someone it expressing partial scores (e.g., the > overall score is 85, but this <div> has a score of 98 and that <div> is a > 42. In this case it is *not * like translate where the meaning is clear: > a translate="yes" bit nested in a translate="no" bit completely overrides > the translation="no" intent. But here the semantics are not so clear. Maybe > it would solve it to state that the attribute does NOT apply to daughter > elements. It's clear that semantically it *does*, but syntactically, we > cannot see this as normal inheritance if the value from the whole cannot be > seen as applying to the parts > > And I see I contradicted myself. First I said that locQualityScore doesn't > make sense going down to daughter elements, which is true in general, but > at the same time it isn't true that if I have some structure like this: > > <div id="1" its-loc-quality-score="80"> > <div id="2" its-loc-quality-score="60">Some bad <span id="A" > its-loc-quality-type="misspelling" > its-loc-quality-code="ABC:SPELLING">kontint</span></div> > <div id="3" its-loc-quality-score="100">Some good content</div> > </div> > > that there is no relation between the daughters and the parent. > > Rather, there is a contributory (i.e., bottom-up) relationship at work > here, not one of normal inheritance: the 80 applies to the whole, not to > the constituent parts. The values for divs 2 and 3 *contribute *to the > value of div 1. > > And going down further, the same applies, the value of 60 applies only to > the div as a whole, not to any part of it. If anything "Some bad" would > have a score of 100 and "kontint" might have a value of 0. > > On the other hand, it is not as if the value associated with divs 2 and 3 > completely replace the value of div 1. If they did there would be no text > to which the value from div 1 applies, which clearly is not the case: it > applies to all of the text in div 1, taken as an intact whole. > > The more I look at the score, the tougher it gets to unify with the other > span-ish (as opposed to Spanish) attributes used to identify specific > errors. > > LocQualityProfile is maybe a bit easier to unify with them, but what I'd > really like to see is something like this: > > <html lang="en"> > <head> > <meta charset="utf-8" /> > <meta its-loc-quality-profile="XYZ:*xyz.com/fake*<http://xyz.com/fake>" > /> > <meta its-loc-quality-profile="PQR:*pqr.com/alsofake*<http://pqr.com/alsofake>" > /> > <title>Some junk in a document</title> > </head> > <body> > <p class="segment" id="s0001"><span > its-loc-quality-type="inconsistent-entities" > its-loc-quality-code="XYZ:wrong_name">Christian Bale</span> > (<span its-loc-quality-type="numbers" > its-loc-quality-code="PQR:numbers_do_not_match" > its-loc-quality-comment="Should be 1867">2067</span>–1934) > conceived of an > instrument that could transmit its sound from a power plant for > hundreds of miles > to listeners over telegraph wiring.</p> > </body> > </html> > > Here the two quality profiles exist side by side and the prefix in > loc-quality-code selects which one applies to which piece of content. > > So the question is if we can do this using the ITS inheritance model and > scoping model or not. If we cannot than we run into having to redeclare the > profile for each and every place we want to use the category. > > -Arle > > > > -- > 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 Tuesday, 7 August 2012 14:26:26 UTC