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

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

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 11:39:09 +0200
Message-ID: <CAL58czoah55w3DFadz2Ec-pTgJ=kqPUACcExneEUF3ZTQVB91A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Arle Lommel <arle.lommel@dfki.de>
Cc: Multilingual Web LT Public List <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>, Jan Nelson <Jan.Nelson@microsoft.com>, Michael Kruppa <Michael.Kruppa@cocomore.com>, Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>, Fredrik Estreen <fredrik.estreen@lionbridge.com>
2012/7/11 Arle Lommel <arle.lommel@dfki.de>

> 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

If that solves the problem of Cocomore and their customers, I'm not afraid
about that :)

> 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.

>From my experience it is OK to enhance a solution which is small and does
the right thing. If you do something in a hurry and do too much, you are
stuck with the mechanism. And don't forget our time line: we want to decide
about this by the end of July. I don't expect clear information about the
regex topic by then (but I may be wrong).


> -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

Felix Sasaki
DFKI / W3C Fellow
Received on Wednesday, 11 July 2012 09:39:39 UTC

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