Re: Spanish Translation of DIWG Glossary

Rhys Lewis wrote:
> Hello Ivan, thanks for your mail.
> 
> The DI Glossary is an odd working draft. It is not a usual rec-track document. We need to 
> evolve it as we write our other rec-track documents, but it is not in a state of flux. Indeed 
 > its last revision was stable for over a year.
> 
> We decided to keep it as a working draft so that we could update it in line with new rec-track 
 > documents appearing. We need our public working drafts to be able to refer to a public 
glossary.
> As we write new documents we may need to add new definitions to the glossary. We have a well defined 
> process for making sure that any updated definitions remain, so that older documents are still valid, 
> and that revisions are linked within the glossary so that people can see how definitions have changed.
> 
> By the way, if you can suggest a better W3C document type more appropriate for a glossary, we'd be 
> happy to consider using it.
> 

I am not sure either... W3C Working Group Note maybe?

> So my main point is that this is not a regular working draft. It is not changing rapidly, and new r
> evisions only appear in order to support publication of new rec-track documents. Personally, I'd be 
> comfortable to see it linked from the translations page.
> 

Great. The question then is (to you and Marta): should I link it as a regular document 
like all the others, or put it on the front page as one of the Spanish glossaries?

Ivan

> Best wishes
> 
> Rhys
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ivan Herman [mailto:ivan@w3.org]
> Sent: 23 February 2005 09:59
> To: Marta Isabel Trejo; Rhys Lewis
> Cc: www-di@w3.org; w3c-translators@w3.org; Stephane Boyera
> Subject: Re: Spanish Translation of DIWG Glossary
> 
> 
> Marta and Rhys,
> 
> as the maintainer of the Translations pages[1] of W3C...
> 
> It is against our usual policy to put the translations of Working drafts in the database 
> that generate that page[1], so I would be uneasy to add this one, too. (Working drafts 
> have a short life span, after all...). I am also not sure that putting a glossary there 
> would be the right approach.
> 
> If you look at [2], we list some of the glossaries that our close 'friends' (translators, 
> W3C Offices) prepare and maintain. It strikes me that would be a much more appropriate 
> place to put the link to, and would be more visible and useful for the community (in this 
> case the community of Spanish Translators). Would you agree with that? If so, my question 
> is to Marta: do yo think I should add this reference now (I am happy to do it) or do you 
> prefer to wait until the original evolves to its final version and you update your 
> translation?
> 
> Thanks you
> 
> Ivan
> 
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Translation/
> [2] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Translation/#res
> 
> Marta Isabel Trejo wrote:
> 
>>Hello,
>>
>>This is to advise that the Spanish translation of the DIWG Glossary 
>>dated 25 August 2003 is available at:
>>http://www.sidar.org/recur/desdi/traduc/es/borrador/WD-di-gloss-20030825/index.html 
>>
>>
>>The original English version is available at:
>>http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-di-gloss-20030825/
>>
>>Your feedback will be greatly appreciated.
>>
>>Kind regards,
>>Marta
>>
>>Marta Trejo
>>marta@sidar.org
>>www.sidar.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 

-- 

Ivan Herman
W3C Communications Team, Head of Offices
C/o W3C Benelux Office at CWI, Kruislaan 413
1098SJ Amsterdam, The Netherlands
tel: +31-20-5924163; mobile: +31-641044153;
URL: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/