RE: [All] action item clean up and publication schedule

Hi Felix,

The below section in question is just an alternative way to list the options and it is used in some other categories. In my opinion it more clearly explains that you need to specify one or both of the disambiguation use cases but it does look like pseudo-code when there are that many sublevels. Currently it’s not entirely clear if you should specify only one of the use cases, unless you look at the example. That’s why I suggested changing the wording in the note to include “MUST use at least one” if keeping the existing list format.

I also intended to suggest to change the order of the second list to be consistent:


    *   A disambigIdent attribute. It contains a string that represents the disambiguation identifier for the disambiguation target that is valid within the specified Disambiguation Source.
    *   A disambigIdentPointer attribute that contains a relative selector<http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#selectors> pointing to a node that represents a unique identifier for the disambiguation target.
    *   A disambigIdentRef attribute. It contains an URI that represents a unique identifier for the disambiguation target.
    *   a disambigIdentRefPointer attribute

Looks like there are a few more cases of “attribute. It contains” that could be replaced with “attribute that contains” and the initial cap is still lowercase. ☺  I know there are more important issues to focus on though.

Cheers,
Fredrik


From: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org]
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 4:11 PM
To: Fredrik Liden
Cc: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
Subject: Re: [All] action item clean up and publication schedule

Hi Fredrik,

thanks a lot for the comments. I tried to implement these at

http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#Disambiguation


I think example 54
http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#EX-disambiguation-html5-rdfa

and 55 are not up to date - Tadej, coud you have a look?

Also, one question below.
2012/10/16 Fredrik Liden <fliden@enlaso.com<mailto:fliden@enlaso.com>>

Hi all,



after looking at the latest Disambiguation section here are a few comments and possibly nitpicking:



* "None of exactly one of the following:" should be "None or exactly one of the following:"

* Under 6.10.2 Implementation, in list, initial cap: a disambigIdentRefPointer attribute.

* I think in example 52 should the selector should be changed from



   selector="/text/body/p/[@id='dublin']"

   to

   selector="/text/body/p/span[@id='dublin']" or selector="/text/body/p/*[@id='dublin']"



*

   ◦A disambigIdentPointer attribute...

   ◦A disambigIdentRef attribute... Would it be better to list the following in this order to be consistent with Localization Note and Terminology (Or follow the order in the latest Translation Agent Provenance, consistent one way or the other)? I found the disambigClassPointer in between the two slightly confusing especially since there is no plain disambigClass:



   ◦A disambigClassPointer attribute...

   ◦A disambigClassRef attribute...

   ◦A disambigClassRefPointer attribute...



   And

   ◦A disambigIdent attribute...

   ◦a disambigIdentRefPointer attribute...

   1. Initial cap A (mentioned above).
   2. Replace "◦A XYX attribute. It contains" with "◦A XYX attribute that contains" to be consistent



* Perhaps clarify "When using a disambiguation rule, the user MUST use one of the use cases for disambiguation:"

Should it be "When using a disambiguation rule, the user MUST use at least one of the use cases for disambiguation:" to be clear. But it seems it's illustrated by the example that both can be used. Optionally, change the list format to the one used in some other data categories se bottom, that might clarify the options.



* Under LOCAL:
"The user MUST use only one of the two addressing modes for disambiguation:"
Should this perhaps say "The user MUST use only one of the two addressing modes for "target identity" disambiguation:" to not confuse it with the above sentence.



What is the below for?

Thanks,

Felix




•At least one of the following:

    •Exactly one of the following:

      ◦A disambigClassRef..

      ◦A disambigClassPointer..

      ◦A disambigClassRefPointer ..



    •One or more of the following:

       •Exactly one of the following:

                 ◦A disambigIdent attribute..

                 ◦A disambigIdentRef attribute..

                 ◦A disambigIdentPointer attribute..

                ◦A disambigIdentRefPointer attribute..



       •An optional disambigSource attribute..



•An optional disambigGranularity attribute..



Cheers,
__________________________________________________

Fredrik Liden
Localization Engineer
ENLASO Corporation
ISO 9001:2008 certified

t: 720.259.8537
e: fliden[at]enlaso[dot]com






-----Original Message-----
From: Yves Savourel
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 6:44 AM
To: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org<mailto:public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
Subject: RE: [All] action item clean up and publication schedule



> while the text is up-to-date, the examples seem to be a couple of

> versions behind - in the last few iterations we were only circulating

> the .doc, so it may have got out of sync.

> I'm attaching the latest examples here - without disambigSourceRef, etc.



Thanks Tadej. I'll update the spec later today.





> Is HTML also case-insensitive for attribute values?

> For element and attribute names it is, not sure about literal values.

> If so, we could change the spec to use dashes (ontologyConcept ->

> ontology-concept).



I'm not sure for the values. Jirka or Felix would know for sure. Maybe it's not an issue.



-yves









--
Felix Sasaki
DFKI / W3C Fellow

Received on Wednesday, 17 October 2012 17:22:21 UTC