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

Re: [all] call for concensus on Translation Provenance Agent (related to ISSUE-22)

From: Dave Lewis <dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 10:52:40 +0100
Message-ID: <50111368.2070506@cs.tcd.ie>
To: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
On 26/07/2012 08:01, Felix Sasaki wrote:
> P.S.: having just "agent" has of course the drawback that you need 
> more rule elements to express the same information. 
> However, it has the benefit that you can be more specific wrt 
> optionality of attributes: currently, all "agent" related attributes 
> are attributes, so this

You mean all 'attributes are optional' right? Yes, that's a good point. 
I wasn't sure about the correct formulation for this and just took the 
lead from the rubyRule where all the attributes are also optional, but 
you are right this leaves the meaningless option of having no attribute 
for agent (I'm not sure if the same is a problem for ruby).

Would a better formulation would be the following?

  * A required *selector* <#att.selector.attribute.selector> attribute.
    It contains an XPath expression which selects the nodes to which
    this rule applies.
  * At least one of the following:
      o A *transAgent* <#att.local.no-ns.attribute.locNoteRef> attribute
        that contains one or more comma separated strings, each one
        identifying a different translation agent.
      o A *transAgentRef* <#att.local.no-ns.attribute.locNoteRef>
        attribute that contains one or more space-separated IRI, each
        referring to a resource that identifies a different translation
        agent.
      o A *transRevisionAgent* <#att.local.no-ns.attribute.locNoteRef>
        attribute that contains one or more comma separated strings,
        each one identifying a different translation revision agent.
      o A *transRevisionAgentRef*
        <#att.local.no-ns.attribute.locNoteRef> attribute that contains
        one or more space-separated IRI, each referring to a resource
        that identifies a different translation revision agent.


> <its:agentRule selector="/html/body/par"/>
> would be legal, but doesn't make sense. If you have just the "agent" 
> attribute and "agentRef", you can say that both (or just the former?) 
> are mandatory - also the "agentType" attribute.
>
> Felix
>

cheers,
Dave


> 2012/7/26 Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org <mailto:fsasaki@w3.org>>
>
>     Hi Dave, all,
>
>     About
>
>     "Two types of Translation Provenance Agent data categories are
>     needed to identify:"
>
>     and the data category in general: wouldn't it be possible to have
>     just two attributes "agent" and "agentRef", and an additional one
>     "type" with the values "transAgent" or "revisionAgent"? In that
>     they there are less attributes and also less pointer attributes
>     (see Yves' comment). It would look like this I think:
>
>     <its:agentRule selector="/html/body/par"
>     its:agentRef="http://www.onlinemtexample.com/2012/7/25/legal-v1/wsdl/"
>      type="transAgent" />
>
>
>     <its:agentRule selector="/html/body/par" agent="John Doe,
>     acme-CAT-v2.3" type="revisionAgent"/>
>
>
>     Small editorial thing: your examples above said "its:domainRule",
>     I changed that to "agentRule".
>
>
>     Another note: in ITS global rules, we always used attributes
>     without a namespace, e.g. "agents" instead of "its:agents".
>
>
>
>     Felix
>
>
>
>     2012/7/25 Dave Lewis <dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie
>     <mailto:dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie>>
>
>         Hi all,
>         Given the implementation commitment to provenance and the
>         previous posting on this subject,
>         http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Jun/0161.html
>         please find attached the proposed specification for the
>         Translation Provenance Agent plus the example files.
>
>         As a reminder, and as discussed in the original post and
>         mentioned at the last WG call, provenance covers two
>         essentially independent approaches: agent provenance, (which
>         is this one), and standoff provenance, which we are treating
>         as two individual data categories. I will send on the standoff
>         provenance call for concensus shortly.
>
>         Regards,
>         Dave
>
>
>
>
>
>     -- 
>     Felix Sasaki
>     DFKI / W3C Fellow
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Felix Sasaki
> DFKI / W3C Fellow
>
Received on Thursday, 26 July 2012 09:52:47 UTC

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