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

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

From: Arle Lommel <arle.lommel@dfki.de>
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 11:31:35 +0200
Cc: Jan Nelson <Jan.Nelson@microsoft.com>, Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>, Michael Kruppa <Michael.Kruppa@cocomore.com>, Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>, Fredrik Estreen <fredrik.estreen@lionbridge.com>
Message-Id: <00C13357-9C52-41E1-A57A-C8AAEA7B5F75@dfki.de>
To: Multilingual Web LT Public List <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
I think we need to find out where Jan’s group is before we decide on this. If they don't have a proposal/implementation ready (yet), then maybe this is the perfect opportunity to coordinate with Microsoft and XLIFF on a common solution. If Microsoft is far along the path and willing to share, then maybe it shortens our development cycle to start where they are.

I'm just afraid that it we end up with a simple enumeration solution without at least range selectors and inverse, we will end up with a solution that will be seen as too cumbersome for many implementers and users. While it meets Michael’s needs and we need to be mindful of what implementers commit to, we also have to keep usability for the broader community in mind, and this is a case where I think that the broader community would expect more from ITS 2.0.

-Arle



On Jul 11, 2012, at 11:19 , Felix Sasaki wrote:

> We had also input from Microsoft (Ian) that they are working on a solution involving regex. So if the "enumeration only" works for Michael's / Cocomores scenario, I would disagree with going even a simple regex approach, to avoid too many solutions in the same problem space.
> 
> Felix
> 
> 2012/7/11 Michael Kruppa <Michael.Kruppa@cocomore.com>
> Hi Yves, Arle, all,
> 
> I totally agree that Arle's proposal is very reasonable. If we can clarify the points Yves made, this would be a good solution from our point of view.
> 
> I would just like to clarify that I meant to say, that the enumeration approach would be sufficient for us in order to avoid data storage and html integration problems.
> It is of course in no way sufficient for the examples Arle has given.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Micha
> 
> ________________________________________
> 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: Mittwoch, 11. Juli 2012 11:07
> An: 'Arle Lommel'; 'Multilingual Web LT Public List'
> Cc: 'Fredrik Estreen'
> Betreff: RE: [ACTION-160] (related to [ACTION-135] too) Summarize specialRequirements
> 
> Hi Arle,
> 
> I like this modest proposal.
> 
> Providing [abc], [^abc] and [a-z] in addition to the enumeration would help.
> And those are standard notations:
> 
> Here is a list of many regex features and how they are compatible.
> http://www.regular-expressions.info/refflavors.html
> 
> The only issues I would see are:
> 
> - the ASCII vs Unicode for things like \w \s, etc.
> We would have probably to decide one way or the other.
> 
> - the \x{NNN} and \p{...}
> Which are not always supported all all engines.
> But maybe we can limit the number of engines to the main ones: Perl5, Java, .NET, Phyton, XML.
> Then things can be simple.
> 
> -ys


Received on Wednesday, 11 July 2012 09:32:12 UTC

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