W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org > May 2013

RE: [ISSUE-55][ACTION-510] Make LQI and LQR similar to mtConfidence in structure.

From: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>
Date: Sat, 11 May 2013 17:29:34 -0600
To: "'Dave Lewis'" <dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie>, <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
Message-ID: <005c01ce4e9f$65c48e70$314dab50$@com>
Hi Dave,

Thanks for the update. For LQI:

"It is recommended that only the the stand-off mode of annotation is used and that its:locQualityIssueType, its:locQualityIssueComment, locQualityIssueSeverity, its:locQualityIssueProfileRef and its:locQualityIssueEnabled are not used within trans-unit or alt-trans elements."

Do we need this paragraph? Is there a reason why only stand-off mode should be used? If there is only one issue why make things more complicated by recommending to use stand-off. Note also that since it's just a recommendation, a tool should still be able to handle direct markup since it still may occur.

-ys


From: Dave Lewis [mailto:dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie] 
Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2013 3:28 PM
To: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
Subject: [ISSUE-55][ACTION-510] Make LQI and LQR similar to mtConfidence in structure.

Hi all,
I have updated the XLIFF 1.2 mappings for data cateogies LQI and LQR as per f2f discussions in Bled:
http://www.w3.org/International/its/wiki/XLIFF_Mapping

Yves, David, can you check through this.

One question I have a question about LQR: is it compatible with inline mark-up as it is defined in the ITS spec as used to "is used to express an overall measurement of the localization quality of a document or an item in a document."? Any thoughts on that?

cheers,
Dave
Received on Saturday, 11 May 2013 23:30:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:32:09 UTC