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

Re: targetPointer Requirement update

From: Dave Lewis <dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 00:31:26 +0100
Message-ID: <4FA9ACCE.7070309@cs.tcd.ie>
To: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
CC: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>, public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
Hi Felix,
Absolutely, we should state very clearly that we want to cover a variety 
of scenarios. I suggested these two as purely illustrative with 'a 
little something for nearly everyone' rather than at this stage trying 
to catalogue all the possible use cases separately.

I'm just trying to contain the amount of writing and editing we need to 
do for the first draft release, certainly not trying to constrain the 
scope in any way.

cheers,
Dave

On 08/05/2012 21:41, Felix Sasaki wrote:
> Here I disagree: there might be scenarios without translation and MT 
> training at all. E.g. the ITS 1.0 data categories Directionality and 
> Ruby are examples of these, but also automatic named entity 
> recognition - not necessarily used for translation of scenario i) and 
> ii) at all, but e.g. as a basis for automatic summarization or other 
> LT processes . Also, there might be an editor that pics up metadata to 
> easy the translation process - ITS 1.0 Translate data category is e.g. 
> realized in SDL trados (IIRC). Again this doesn't fit into type i) or ii).
>
> Above situation is not bad IMO - take the BCP 47 language identifiers 
> as an example: these are used for a huge variety of scenarios (search, 
> rendering (font selection), basis for locale identifiers, spelling 
> correction etc.). Users are not confused by this variety, since the 
> identifier is very clearly identified.
>
> So rather than trying to group everything under two IMO (very 
> localization specific) scenarios, I would propose to mention in the 
> introduction that we want to cover a variety of scenarios - like we 
> say in the charter: "... producers of content, localization workers, 
> language technology experts, browser vendors, tool makers and users.". 
> I will make some detailed comments in the requirements document 
> tomorrow along these lines.
>
> I am also wondering whether we can re-use some of the usage scenarios 
> described in the ITS requirements document
> http://www.w3.org/TR/itsreq/#scenarios
> that document talks about XML, but besides that the approach is rather 
> general.
>
> Best,
>
> Felix
Received on Tuesday, 8 May 2012 23:31:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:31:44 UTC