[All - a bit urgent: use case preparation for Prague] Re: [ACTION-145] Roundtrip use case demo documentation

Hi Dave,

I'm changing the topic since I hope that we can decide on this soon, since
many people already work on use case examples for the "implementation demo"
session 25 September.

Can we agree on the simple version? You write "A quick summary section
directly giving the benefits as you suggest would definitely be good." - I
just want to be sure that everybody would prepare something like that,
along the lines mentioned below:

- This is our implementation.

- The metadata solves the following problems:

(bullet list). Example for "translate": "translate metadata assures that
pieces of content are not translated

- Benefits: better translation quality, ...

Above is basically what you created in the wiki, just scaled down. So
details are fine too, but everybody is busy after the summer break, and
what we currently mostly need are simple example - not for us, but the
people (hopefully) watching us :)

More comments (not so urgent ;) ) below.


2012/9/14 Dave Lewis <dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie>

> Hi Felix,
> Thanks for those suggestions. Currently, I was targetting this at a level
> useful primarily for communication within the WG leading upto Prague. So we
> can then refine these for a more general audience after that - when the
> spec is more stable.
>
> A quick summary section directly giving the benefits as you suggest would
> definitely be good.
>
> By general audience, I guess you still mean someone interested in the
> technical details of interoperability and wanting to understand the
> specific benefits of ITS? So the aim would be to get them reading and
> hopefully implementing (or asking a provider to implement) ITS2.0 - right?
>

A general audience would IMO be somebody who doesn't know about language
technology, ITS metadata and the tools we are working on - but we want to
convince him that the tools solve a real life problem.


>
> We are aiming for a sample online version of CMS LION exactly as you
> suggest - but we don't have a roll-out date yet -  a few month off I think.
> Certainly the aim is to have an interesting multiway
> (XLIFF/PROV/ITS/RDF/NIF) interoperability demonstrator for CNGL, rather
> than a product or downloadable library.
>


Understand, for TCD as an academic participant in the group / project that
totally makes sense. However, for the industry partners I would hope that
we can get something along the lines of Okapi or ITSTools. The main point
is not open source or not, but re-producability.


>
> You are right about the language info not being directly used in the
> scenario, since we use translate to impact the MT behaviour. It was more to
> help us test out the CMS-LION parsing for this. We'll have a bit more of a
> think of a good example for language info - its a bit tricky to think of
> one in HTML5.
>

The main use case for language information is to map non xml:lang
attributes to the value you would expect xml:lang. That can e.g. support
workflow decisions ("should this content go to MT engine / translator A or
B?"). So if you have an example along those lines in XML, I'm happy to
create an HTML5 version.

Best,

Felix



>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>
> On 12/09/2012 09:01, Felix Sasaki wrote:
>
>>
>> hanks a lot for the template and the example. I would propose to simplify
>> the description a lot. It is too detailed for a general audience. We can
>> add more detailed descriptions in a separate section. But the main section
>> could just consist of short descriptions - max 1 paragraph for each item -
>> saying:
>>
>> - This is our implementation: CMS Lion, Statistical MT System.
>>
>> - The metadata solves the following problems:
>>
>> (bullet list). Example for "translate": "translate metadata assures that
>> pieces of content are not translated
>>
>> - Benefits: better translation quality, ...
>>
>> - Example.
>>
>>
>
>


-- 
Felix Sasaki
DFKI / W3C Fellow