- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 15:51:48 +0200
- To: "Dr. David Filip" <David.Filip@ul.ie>
- CC: Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>, Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>, public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
- Message-ID: <5194E474.6040406@w3.org>
Am 16.05.13 15:16, schrieb Dr. David Filip: > Thanks, Felix, > inline > > Dr. David Filip > ======================= > LRC | CNGL | LT-Web | CSIS > University of Limerick, Ireland > telephone: +353-6120-2781 > *cellphone: +353-86-0222-158* > facsimile: +353-6120-2734 > mailto: david.filip@ul.ie <mailto:david.filip@ul.ie> > > > On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org > <mailto:fsasaki@w3.org>> wrote: > > Am 16.05.13 11:56, schrieb Dr. David Filip: >> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz >> <mailto:jirka@kosek.cz>> wrote: >> >> On 16.5.2013 10:59, Dr. David Filip wrote: >> >> > It should aslo say >> > that the extensions MUST not provide features provided by >> the ITS core >> > elements attributes. I understand that we can hardly build >> test cases for >> > this MUST, but it is important to stress. >> >> There is no reason for specifying this. ITS is used in host >> languages >> and they are already providing their own means for some data >> categories >> (usually lang, dir, translate). >> >> Of course they do, so you need global rules for an ITS processor >> to recognize them as such. >> Enforcing is not just about testing. If someone introduces a >> global rule using an extended element, it is against the spirit >> of the standard to let this overlap with any ITS feature. If you >> do not use normative language to say so in the spec, you have >> later on no base for saying that such use of extensibility is not >> conformant... >> >> >> Anyway you can enforce such rule in practice so it doesn't >> make sense to >> introduce it. >> >> >> ITS is kind enough to allow other namespaces, the ITS >> processors can >> >> simply ignore them, and that’s the end of the story. >> >> >> > In order to make the schema changes, the spec must >> unequivocally say where >> > those extended elements and attributes are allowed. It is >> anarchy and not a >> > standard otherwise. >> >> This is now described in RELAX NG schema -- its20.rnc. >> Basically foreign >> elements can be used only inside its:rules. Foreign >> attributes can be >> used on any element defined in ITS. >> >> I agree with the solution materially, all I say is that this must >> also occur in prose descriptions of the elements. > > Thank you for stating your agreement, David. To make sure I > understand and for the record: you agree with the schema change > Jirka made, see also > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-commits/2013May/0044.html > [foreign > > elements can be used only inside its:rules. Foreign attributes can be > used on any element defined in ITS.] > > ? > > Again, I do agree with the change materially and the schema change is > OK with me > > > Wrt to the spec change: having the text in prose description for > all elements doesn't sound feasible. > > If we do not list it for every element than appendix D and schema will > be in conflict with the rest of the prose specification. Well, we can also put it on the beginning of http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#datacategory-description and say "This statement relates to all elements defined in this specification". In that way it "inherits" to all definitions. Is there a problem with this? > *The element descriptions are ENUMERATIVE in the main body of the > spec. Therefore the spec is currently in conflict with the schema!* > I put the example and into reply to Yves.. > > How about adding what you agreed to > "Foreign elements can be used only inside its:rules. Foreign > attributes can be > > used on any element defined in ITS." > > To > http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#its-schemas > > ? > > As I said in response to Yves, it is good to have the blanket > statement in appendix D. > Can zou confirm that Appendix D is nornmative? > Shouldn't it be introduced with the italics text. > /This section is normative/ I did, see http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html How about ending this thread and just continuing the action-527 thread, to keep things together? Best, Felix > Just to be sure.. > > Best, > > Felix > > > >> >> Jirka >> >> >> -- >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Jirka Kosek e-mail: jirka@kosek.cz >> <mailto:jirka@kosek.cz> http://xmlguru.cz >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Professional XML consulting and training services >> DocBook customization, custom XSLT/XSL-FO document processing >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> OASIS DocBook TC member, W3C Invited Expert, ISO JTC1/SC34 rep. >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Bringing you XML Prague conference http://xmlprague.cz >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> > >
Received on Thursday, 16 May 2013 13:52:12 UTC