Re: issue-51 too many global rules

Hi Felix,
I have a further thought actually on pointer and ref pointer attributes 
in general below:

On 23/10/2012 17:24, Felix Sasaki wrote:
> 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.

So, I'm not even sure that we need even the pointer attributes for 
certain data categories.

I tried to outlined in:

that pointer and points ref attributes didn't make much sense for data 
categories that were more provenential in nature, i.e. the were 
generated in the localisation chain, rather than being 
internationalisation instructions from content authoring processes.

I probably didn't argue this very clearly, and apologies Felix for being 
slow in clarifying as you asked in:

Yves makes the point more succinctly in:

where he says:
"I'm less concerned with 'complex/rare' data categories like 
Disambiguation, or MT Confidence, because it's unlikely an existing 
format has the equivalent."

I'd agree. Certainly with provenance I found it difficult to come up 
with examples using Pointer and RefPointer data attributes. I couldn't 
think of an existing schema elements that I'd point to, so the examples 
use rather contrived elements. If this is the case, should we just state 
that people should use the direct value or ref ITS data attributes and 
drop Pointer and RefPointer in both GLOBAL and LOCAL usage?

Shaun's excellent point about what to do when more than one node matches 
the relative path of a pointer is also significant here in killing off 

I don't know if this applies to the quality issue data category. They 
use Pointer for mapping to 'native' attributes in example80 in the 
current draft, but did the native 'issue' element and those attributes 
'type', 'note', 'value' and 'profile' attribute reflect a known used schema?

So, Felix, regardless of the outcome of the other global rule 
discussions, in several cases (i.e. potentially for QualityIssue, 
Quality Precis, transAgentProvenance, disambiguation, text analysis 
annotation/confidence and mtconfidence) rather than pointers being 
'sufficient', I don't think we need them _at all_ (for global or local). 


> Best,
> Felix

Received on Tuesday, 23 October 2012 23:37:09 UTC