RE: issue-51 too many global rules

Hi all,


I agree with Felix, I’ve been thinking and I don’t quite see the point of
using global rules with some of data categories, such as QualityIssue,
translation provenance, revision provenance that we’re using in WP4.


I still want to think about this a little bit more, but if I were forced to
choose at gunpoint right now I would choose to drop them regardless of the
mark-up attributes issue.




Pablo Nieto Caride

Dpto. Técnico/I+D+i

Linguaserve Internacionalización de Servicios, S.A.

Tel.: +34 91 761 64 60 ext. 0422
Fax: +34 91 542 89 28 

E-mail:  <> <> 


«En cumplimiento con lo previsto con los artículos 21 y 22 de la Ley
34/2002, de 11 de julio, de Servicios de la Sociedad de Información y
Comercio Electrónico, le informamos que procederemos al archivo y
tratamiento de sus datos exclusivamente con fines de promoción de los
productos y servicios ofrecidos por LINGUASERVE INTERNACIONALIZACIÓN DE
SERVICIOS, S.A. En caso de que Vdes. no deseen que procedamos al archivo y
tratamiento de los datos proporcionados, o no deseen recibir comunicaciones
comerciales sobre los productos y servicios ofrecidos, comuníquenoslo a, y su petición será inmediatamente cumplida.»


"According to the provisions set forth in articles 21 and 22 of Law 34/2002
of July 11 regarding Information Society and eCommerce Services, we will
store and use your personal data with the sole purpose of marketing the
products and services offered by LINGUASERVE INTERNACIONALIZACIÓN DE
SERVICIOS, S.A. If you do not wish your personal data to be stored and
handled, or you do not wish to receive further information regarding
products and services offered by our company, please e-mail us to Your request will be processed immediately.”


De: Felix Sasaki [] 
Enviado el: martes, 23 de octubre de 2012 18:25
Para: Dave Lewis
Asunto: Re: issue-51 too many global rules


Hi Dave, all,

2012/10/23 Dave Lewis <>

On 23/10/2012 14:52, Felix Sasaki wrote:

I know - my point is not about pointers, but about "adding information
*without fixed values* to attributes or elements". I just can't imagine
people writing rules like this


<its:locQualityIssueRule selector="//span[@id='q1']"
locQualityIssueType="typographical" locQualityIssueComent="Sentence without
capitalization" locQualityIssueSeverity="50"/>


That is, tailored to one "span" element. Am I wrong?


Hi Felix,
I think you are right on the point that authoring global rules doesn't scale
for individual spans. You make the same point well in relation to provenance

That was in response to my suggestion that it may be 'convenient' to write
global rules in certain circumstances. To give a more concrete example, look
at the source view on a microsoft support page, e.g.:

There you would see fragments like:
<li>Click <b class="ui">Picture Tools</b> &gt; <b class="ui">Format</b> &gt;
<b class="ui">Size</b> and click the arrow under <b
here's where a class attribute identifies a type of content likely to be
treated differently during localization. So having a global rule with a
selector="//b[@class='ui'] would be more convenient for overriding, e.g. the
provenance of translation by software translators for these nodes over
provenance recording documentation translators for the rest of the page.

It would be interesting to hear from out Microsoft friends on how they do
this in practice. Presumably this is generated from some source content and
they may have tooling that can easily manage the insertion of local mark-up
- but for other trying to address the same problem more manually, one can
imagine that global rules, especially related to class attributes or <code>
elements, would indeed be a convenience. 

It would be good to hear from some of the industrial implementers on whether
this really is a convenience or not for them. If not, i would not strongly
feel the need to retain global rules purely for the convenience of avoiding
local mark-up in these cases.


Great, I agree. So let's see if we get feedback by the TPAC meeting, and if
not, let's drop the global rules in question.


However, I think Yves' point that we would loose the ability to mark-up
attributes without global rules is a much stronger argument for retaining
them - that feels like a real loss of expressiveness that is already
established in ITS1.0.



If nobody uses the expressiveness, we don't need to add it to new data
categories in ITS 2.0. I still get nightmares from rubyPointer .... :)

In ITS 1.0 the expressiveness was mostly used on a per format basis, e.g.
saying "all 'alt' attributes at HTML 'img' should be translated. I don't see
the "per document format" or even "per template" use case for  


QualityIssue, Quality Precis, Disambiguation, mtConfidence, text analysis
annotation, translation provenance.


So for these the "pointer attributes" (or even reference pointer only) might
be sufficient.








Felix Sasaki

DFKI / W3C Fellow


Received on Tuesday, 23 October 2012 16:57:57 UTC