- From: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>
- Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2012 05:51:47 -0700
- To: <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
Hi all, What bugs me in toolRef/revToolRef and toolsRef is that Provenance's toolRef is doing basically the same thing as toolsRef. And that provenance can also use toolsRef: this is bound to be confusing. I understand that we selected that that specific data category needed to allow for two tool's references: toolRef and revToolRef. Maybe another solution would be to allow the main toolsRef to be set for two types of provenance, something like: toolsRef="provenance|uri1 provenance-ref|uri2" Then the breach on the general pattern of using toolsRef to specify the tools would be less than having a whole data category define its own way. cheers, -yves -----Original Message----- From: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org] Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2012 4:33 AM To: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org Subject: [All] its-tool-ref vs. its-tools-ref Hi all, while working on http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#list-of-elements-and-attributes I realized that the provenance "reference to tools" attribute is very similar to the its tool annotation attribute: - in provenance: its-tool-ref or its:toolRef - for ITS annotation: its-tools-ref or its:toolsRef I think we should rename its-tools-ref (that is the annotation mechanism) including the XML counterpart its:toolsRef) to avoid confusion. Since that is a normative change we should get this done on Monday before the call. Any suggestions? - Felix
Received on Saturday, 1 December 2012 12:52:17 UTC