RE: [spec] question

That or what was there before work for me.

Removing it entirely would work for me as well.


We should probably wait for Felix and Richard’s input before updating this: one of them wrote that I think.





From: Arle Lommel [] 
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2012 11:34 AM
To: Yves Savourel
Cc: 'Multilingual Web LT Public List'
Subject: Re: [spec] question


Yves, I think that makes sense, so how about the following rewrite?


The definition of what a localization process or localization parameters must address is outside the scope of this specification and it does not address all of the mechanisms or data formats (sometimes called Localization Properties) that may be be needed to configure localization workflows or process specific formats. However, it does define standard data categories that may be used in defining localization workflows or processing specific formats.


If I understand your statement, I think this is a clearer formulation. Does it work for you?




On Jul 20, 2012, at 11:26 , Yves Savourel wrote:

Hi Arle,


My 2 cents: I think this basically says: “ITS doesn’t make specific provisions to tell you what a localization workflow configuration/parameters should be. It just provide some standard data that may be useable to define your own.”





From: Arle Lommel [] 
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2012 10:59 AM
To: Multilingual Web LT Public List
Subject: [spec] question


Hello all,


I've got a quick question about a passage in the spec that I find very confusing:


This standard does not cover all mechanisms and data formats (sometimes called Localization Properties) that might be needed for configuring localization workflows or tools to process a specific format. However, these mechanisms and data formats may be implemented using the framework described in this standard.


If I follow this, it is simply saying that there will be some things needed to support localization that simply remain outside the scope of this document (e.g., most of the requirements bits that won't make it in the spec), which seems right. But then what does the second sentence mean? It seems to be saying that there is a bunch of stuff outside the scope of this document but you can implement it using what is in this document. But that doesn't make sense. Let's suppose I want to implement a mechanism to use translation parameters (a data format from Linport) along with the translation. There is nothing in the "framework described in this standard" to tell me how to do that, and this statement therefore seems misleading.


Maybe I'm missing an obvious interpretation, but I just don't get what this means. So I do think it needs to be clearer. Can anyone help clarify the intent here?




Received on Friday, 20 July 2012 09:42:11 UTC