- From: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>
- Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2012 14:06:09 -0700
- To: <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
Hi David, all, > ...@Owners of mtconfidence, disambiguation, locquality issue, loc precis, please > react and state weather the above approach is OK for specifying <0;1> rational > intervals as values for your data category. For Localization Quality Issue: the value, unlike the other data categories noted above, is not a 'confidence' measure, but a severity indicator. In most implementations this information is often represented with a set of fixed values (e.g. "note, warning, error", "low, medium, high, critical", etc.), so the ITS value will often be just a matter of mapping. Also unlike the 'confidence' values where the higher values are "better", for this data category the lower values are "better". So I don't think there is a case to change the current 0-100 range to a "confidence"-like 0-1. At some point several months ago we decided to go from integer to decimal to allow more precision and potential avoid round-trip lose in some cases. The text is currently up-to-date as far as referring to "... rational number in the interval 0 to 100 inclusive. The value follows the XML Schema decimal data type with the constraining facets minInclusive set to 0 and maxInclusive set to 100." So that part is done. cheers, -yves
Received on Friday, 23 November 2012 21:07:08 UTC