RE: [All] high level use cases not yet ready to publish, please have another look - Enrycher/Tadej -

Hi Christian,

Thank you for doing the changes. Here are my answers to the two questions.


1.
Close, but not quite there yet :) . Our use case does not touch manual human annotation of terminology. Our use case shows only automated terminology annotation. I think you misinterpreted the first paragraph that stated:
“The ITS 2.0 Enriched Terminology Annotation Use Case allows users (human and machine alike) to automatically annotate term candidates and identify terms in Web content that is enriched with ITS 2.0 metadata in HTML5, XLIFF and plaintext formats.”

The Showcase allows users to automatically annotate with the help of the system rather than manually by human users (how it can be interpreted now). In the revised version it is not clear from where the second (automated annotation) paragraph came and how does it relate to human or machine users.

“ACCURAT Toolkit” is the name of the software package – it should not be changed to “ACCURAT toolkit”.

Everything else looks good :)


2.
I’m not sure whether it is better to say “content by domain separately” rather than “content per domain separately”. http://simple.wiktionary.org/wiki/per - suggests that it was correct as it was. “by domain”, however, sounds a bit weird (something is either missing or the meaning is changed). What do you think?

“The information is used to decide which elements are extracted as in-line codes and sub-flows.” – this is the original (I know that I re-used someone else’s text), however, I believe that there has to be a comma before “which”. Apologies – I did not notice this before.

“by language” – same as for “Domain”.

To keep consistency, please change the “The user will be asked to provide a source (default) language, however, the default language will be overridden with ITS 2.0 Language Information metadata if present in the content.” to a similar text as for Domain: “The user is asked to provide a default (source) language.”. I see that you removed the longer explanation – it should also be removed from the Language Information then.

The rest looks good.

Again, thank you for doing the revision :)

Best regards,
Mārcis ;o)

From: Lieske, Christian [mailto:christian.lieske@sap.com]
Sent: Monday, March 04, 2013 7:57 AM
To: Mārcis Pinnis
Cc: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
Subject: RE: [All] high level use cases not yet ready to publish, please have another look - Enrycher/Tadej -

Hi Marcis,

While editing the section on “Term Candidates” the following specific questions came up. Hopefully, it is alright to contact you with them …


1.      Did I revise the “description” properly?


2.      Did I revise the “data category use” properly?

Thanks in advance for your help.

Of course, you are welcome to modify my current draft to come up with an enhanced version:

http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Use_cases_-_high_level_summary#Term_Candidate_Generation_and_Enrichment

Cheers,
Christian

From: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org]
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2013 2:34 AM
To: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org<mailto:public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
Subject: [All] high level use cases not yet ready to publish, please have another look

Hi all, esp. Christian,

I had a brief look at
http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Use_cases_-_high_level_summary
and I think this is not yet ready even for a first public working draft.

I won't point to specific sections here, but please have another look at "your" section with the following in mind:

- Don't mention something that is not in the spec anymore, e.g. "Disambiguation". Call this "Text Analysis Annotation".
- The "More Information and Implementation Status/Issues" sections are extremely heterogenous. Please, re-write them following this simple pattern taken from ENLASO:


[

Tool: Okapi Framework (ENLASO).

 *   Detailed slides at http://tinyurl.com/8tmg49d
 *   Running software: http://code.google.com/p/okapi/downloads/list
 *   Source code: http://code.google.com/p/okapi/source/browse/
 *   General documentation: http://www.opentag.com/okapi/wiki/
]

- Don't just "list" data categories. Describe their benefit in your implementation.
- Use a simple & sweet language style like e.g. in
http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Use_cases_-_high_level_summary#Simple_Machine_Translation


The document should be a *high level* overview. Currently it has 20 pages - that's too long. We can provide details & more text in other publications.

NOTE for the EC project folks: this document is an important part for us to raise awareness for Rome and to give input for the Luxembourg review. Please invest the time to take above considerations into account.

Please, do that by Tuesday EOB 19 February.

Christian, what are your thoughts on editing this and making this ready for publication, also in terms fo timing.

Best,

Felix