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

RE: [All] question to implementors (Re: [ACTION-155] (related to [ISSUE-16]) parameters for rules)

From: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2012 20:37:32 +0200
To: "'Felix Sasaki'" <fsasaki@w3.org>, "'Jirka Kosek'" <jirka@kosek.cz>
CC: <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
Message-ID: <assp.0536cebc16.assp.05365091dd.009f01cd5d38$bd8b7f00$38a27d00$@com>
Sound good.


I would just add that implementing <its:param> is relatively simple.






From: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org] 
Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2012 6:10 PM
To: Jirka Kosek
Cc: Yves Savourel; public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
Subject: [All] question to implementors (Re: [ACTION-155] (related to [ISSUE-16]) parameters for rules)


Hi all,


I have no objections against the latest proposal from Jirka if we get a clear statement that 

"implementation MUST support its:param"

is no issue, for all implementors in the group. I know that some (e.g. David Filip) are thinking of just wrapping okapi tools for at least some ITS processing, but for the others I'm not sure. So I would propose to close this by asking TCD, DCU, Moravia, Cocomore, Linguaserve, VistaTec, Lucy Software to confirm that they will implement this. Would that be OK for everybody?





2012/7/6 Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>

On 6.7.2012 8:52, Yves Savourel wrote:

> - We don't have restrictions about not using variables in XPath expressions, but we don't have a way to declare them and provide defaults. So I think it's important to have <its:param> (isn't it like fixing a 1.0 oversight?)

Actually declared variables are part of XPath context. As we haven't
said anything about XPath context i ITS 1.0 no variables were declared.
So I think that ITS 1.0 is in this aspect fine (although it contains
another small problems related to XPath integration).

> - Should we make a distinction between:
> A) supporting <its:param>, that it: understanding <its:param> and providing the defaults value to the XPath engine,
> and B) (in addition) supporting overriding the ITS parameters, that is: providing a way (tool-specific) to set values other than the defaults?

I think that we should say:

- implementation MUST support its:param
- implementation SHOULD provide means for changing its:param and such
means are implementation defined


  Jirka Kosek      e-mail: jirka@kosek.cz      http://xmlguru.cz
       Professional XML consulting and training services
  DocBook customization, custom XSLT/XSL-FO document processing
 OASIS DocBook TC member, W3C Invited Expert, ISO JTC1/SC34 member


Felix Sasaki

DFKI / W3C Fellow

Received on Sunday, 8 July 2012 18:38:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:31:47 UTC