Re: issue-51 too many global rules

agenda+ for the f2f meeting - go through all data categories and check what
global rules are useful.

Some input here: would it make sense to at least drop global rules from
disambiguation? I don't see a use case for that. Tadej, all?

Best,

Felix


2012/10/24 Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>

> It seems that having global rules that use non-pointers attributes helps
> (and make sense) in some cases, as Dave and Mauricio illustrated.****
>
> ** **
>
> It seems that for several data categories the only pointer attribute that
> is likely to be really use would be for the stand-off reference.****
>
> ** **
>
> So, if we fill there is a need for clean up, maybe we should keep all
> global rules, but trim the pointers attributes in some cases.****
>
> ** **
>
> -yves****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 23, 2012 9:46 PM
> *To:* Yves Savourel
> *Cc:* Dave Lewis; public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
>
> *Subject:* Re: issue-51 too many global rules****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> 2012/10/24 Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>****
>
> Hi Dave, Felix, all,
>
> The rarity of use case for pointers in those data categories is also
> compounded when the data category has several values: As Felix noted,
> because of the complete overriding clause, we can only use all pointers or
> none for a data category.
>
> I would still argue to keep any refPointer to stand-off markup though.
> XLIFF 2.0 is a use case for it.****
>
> ** **
>
> +1. However, Mauricio had a nice example about global rules for provenance
> ****
>
> ** **
>
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Oct/0291.html
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> That seemed elegant and is similar to Dave's previous , so I'm not sure
> anymore how to move forward about the issue. Thoughts?****
>
> ** **
>
> Felix****
>
> ** **
>
>  ****
>
>
> -yves****
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Lewis [mailto:dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 5:37 PM
> To: Felix Sasaki
> Cc: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
> Subject: 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:
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Oct/0079.html
>
> 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:
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Oct/0093.html
>
> Yves makes the point more succinctly in:
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Oct/0272.html
>
> 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
> pointers:
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Oct/0179.html
>
> 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).
> Thoughts?
>
> cheers,
> Dave
>
> > Best,
> >
> > Felix
>
> ****
>
>
>
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> --
> Felix Sasaki****
>
> DFKI / W3C Fellow****
>
> ** **
>



-- 
Felix Sasaki
DFKI / W3C Fellow