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

AW: [ACTION-160] (related to [ACTION-135] too) Summarize specialRequirements

From: Michael Kruppa <Michael.Kruppa@cocomore.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 09:27:52 +0000
To: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>, 'Felix Sasaki' <fsasaki@w3.org>
CC: "public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org" <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>, 'Fredrik Estreen' <Fredrik.Estreen@lionbridge.com>
Message-ID: <BA8D6F5CB68E3C49A6DCB70414516020602CDA@AMXPRD0510MB388.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Hi all,

I would just like to point out that for us, the specialRequirements meta tag appears to be of high relevance with respect to some of the business cases we have in mind for future usage of ITS. Therefore, we would like to declare our strong support for this meta tag and we will be happy to implement it on the CMS side.



Dr. Michael Kruppa, Senior IT-Consultant 
Tel.: +49 69 972 69 189 Fax: +49 69 972 69 204; E-Mail: michael.kruppa@cocomore.com 
Cocomore AG, Gutleutstraße 30, D-60329 Frankfurt
Internet: http://www.cocomore.de Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/cocomore Google+: http://plus.cocomore.de
Cocomore ist aktives Mitglied im World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) und im Bundesverband Digitale Wirtschaft (BVDW)
Cocomore is active member of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
Vorstand: Dr. Hans-Ulrich von Freyberg (Vors.), Dr. Jens Fricke, Marc Kutschera, Vors. des Aufsichtsrates: Martin Velasco, Sitz: Frankfurt/Main, Amtsgericht Frankfurt am Main, HRB 51114

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Yves Savourel [mailto:ysavourel@enlaso.com] 
Gesendet: Montag, 9. Juli 2012 09:58
An: 'Felix Sasaki'
Cc: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org; 'Fredrik Estreen'
Betreff: RE: [ACTION-160] (related to [ACTION-135] too) Summarize specialRequirements

Hi Felix, all,

> So I think - if I understand you correctly - what you want to achieve 
> is that tools that make use of metadata that is coming from various 
> sources (XLIFF, ITS, PO, ..). Currently that metadata is not coming at 
> all, or only in priority ways. The aim now is to have one agreed 
> metadata definition for max-size, right?
> ...
> ...
> What worries me then is that we aim to create a single piece of 
> metadata, which is not part of the big picture. That raises several 
> questions / requirements:

Maybe it'll help to go back at the root of this requirement (as far as I understand it):

Sometimes a string to be translated has a limitation on how long it can be. The limitation can be in the storage (fixed length DB field in a CMS for example), or in the display: We are talking about the storage here.

What I think ITS needs to provide is the way to pass that information down the consumer tools so the limitation can be verified at some stage (for example: during the translation, or/and at a QA step after).

That's the "big picture" for me. I'm not sure what you mean by "special purpose length solution". To me the proposal Giuseppe has for maxStorgeSize is rather general.

But maybe I'm missing your point.

Received on Wednesday, 11 July 2012 08:00:35 UTC

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