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

RE: ACTION-161 "Talk to shaun about BCP47 compatibility"

From: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2012 20:49:12 +0200
To: "'Felix Sasaki'" <fsasaki@w3.org>, "'Shaun McCance'" <shaunm@gnome.org>
CC: <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
Message-ID: <assp.0536862796.assp.0536ec4795.00a701cd5d3a$5e94aa60$1bbdff20$@com>
Just a small correction:
I don’t think Shaun ha sthis implemented.
I think he was part of the discussion where the possible data category was discussed in the ITS interest group, and described here: (http://www.w3.org/International/its/wiki/IssuesAndProposedFeatures#Proposal:_data_category_for_automated_language_processing).

-ys
\
From: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org] 
Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2012 6:38 PM
To: Shaun McCance
Cc: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
Subject: ACTION-161 "Talk to shaun about BCP47 compatibility"

Hi Shaun,

with
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Jul/0010.html
as a basis, at 
http://www.w3.org/2012/07/05-mlw-lt-minutes.html#item13
we discussed autoLanguageProcessingRule.

One aspect that came up was whether this should be specific to transliteration - Yves mentioned that you have implemented this not only for transliteration, but also for machine translation.

That leads to the question what the relation to BCP 47 "t" extension should be. See as an input the RFC for the "t" extension
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6497
which has transliteration as an example
und-Latn-t-und-cyrl

and the discussion at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Jun/0155.html
(

>> 5) WRT to the tags that Mark mentioned in 1. below: are the "transform"
>> XML files here
>> http://unicode.org/cldr/trac/browser/tags/release-21-0-2/common/bcp47 the
)
This discussion showed that the fields for the "t" extension include also values for machine translation, see
http://unicode.org/cldr/trac/browser/tags/release-21-0-2/common/bcp47/transform_mt.xml
[
<key extension="t" name="t0" description="Machine Translation:
8                 Used to indicate content that has been machine translated, or a request for a particular type of machine translation of content.
9                 The first subfield in a sequence would typically be a 'platform' or vendor designation." since="21.0.2">
10                   <type name="und" description="The choice of machine translation is not specified. Used when the only information known (or requested) is that the text was machine translated." since="21.0.2" />
]

For other "transform" fields, see
http://unicode.org/cldr/trac/browser/tags/release-21-0-2/common/bcp47/transform.xml
We now want to make sure that - if we provide a data category "autoLanguageProcessingRule" - that this is somehow consistent with the BCP 47 approach, or that at least we have a good story why it doesn't need to be consistent. Do you have any thoughts about this?

Looking very much forward to your feedback,

Felix

-- 
Felix Sasaki
DFKI / W3C Fellow
Received on Sunday, 8 July 2012 18:49:41 UTC

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