RE: Your comments on the Character Model [C080-C086, C090-C100, C102-C105, C107-C111]

Hello Richard,

My sincere apologies for getting back to you so long after your response
- intensive travelling in the interim.
Thank you for coming back on C104 and with a change too.
The reworded text is great and clarified the issue.

Thanks,
Yin Leng

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Ishida [mailto:ishida@w3.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, 7 May 2003 11:31 PM
To: Husband, Yin-Leng; www-i18n-comments@w3.org
Cc: w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org
Subject: RE: Your comments on the Character Model [C080-C086, C090-C100,
C102-C105, C107-C111]

Hello Yin-Leng,

Thankyou for coming back to us on the point below.  We have revisited
the issue and made some further changes to the document based on your
remarks.   We have added the following explanation to the Last Call
Comment Table: 

=======
Decision: Accepted. We understand the concern. 

Action: Text has been reworded "There is also a need, often satisfied by
the same or similar mechanisms, to express characters not directly
representable in the character encoding chosen for a particular document
or program (an instance of the markup or programming language)."
========

Please let us know if this resolves your issue.

Best regards,
Richard.


============
Richard Ishida
W3C

tel: +44 1753 480 292
http://www.w3.org/International/
http://www.w3.org/People/Ishida/



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Husband, Yin-Leng [mailto:Yin-leng.Husband@hp.com] 
> Sent: 18 February 2003 01:49
> To: ishida@w3.org; www-i18n-comments@w3.org
> Cc: w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org; Husband, Yin-Leng
> Subject: RE: Your comments on the Character Model [C080-C086, 
> C090-C100, C102-C105, C107-C111]
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Thank you for responding to my comments.
> I've reviewed the following
> C084, C091, C092, C093, C094, C099, C100, C104
> and accept all the decisions except for C104.
> 
> *****C104 [1075]3.7 "instances of the language" vs "the
>    language"
>      * Comment (received 2002-05-31) -- [1077]WSArch WG 
> review of Charmod
>        LC #2
>        Character Escaping, 1st paragraph, 3rd sentence
>        "There is also a need, often satisfied by the same or similar
>        mechanisms, to express characters not directly representable in
>        the character encoding of instances of the language."
>        Why "instances of the language" and not just "the language" ?
>      * Decision: Not applicable
>      * Rationale for "Not applicable": Languages don't have character
>        encodings inherently associated with them. Language 
> instances do.
> 
> It is basically my own lack of understanding of the rationale, 
> i.e. why don't languages have inherently associated character 
> encodings whereas language instances do.  It boils down to 
> not knowing the difference between a language and a language instance.
> 
> I suggest that additional explanation or examples be given 
> for the sentence in question.
> 
> 
> 
> Yin-Leng Husband
> Technology Strategist
> Enterprise Integration & Development                         
> Hewlett-Packard Company
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Ishida [mailto:ishida@w3.org] 
> Sent: Tuesday, 18 February 2003 1:34 AM
> To: Husband, Yin-Leng
> Cc: www-i18n-comments@w3.org; w3c-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: Your comments on the Character Model [C080-C086, 
> C090-C100, C102-C105, C107-C111]
> 
[snip]



USEFUL LINKS
==============
[1] The version of CharMod you commented on: 
http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-charmod-20020430/
[2] Latest editor's version (still being edited): 
http://www.w3.org/International/Group/charmod-edit/
[3] Last Call comments table, sorted by ID: 
http://www.w3.org/International/Group/2002/charmod-lc/


============
Richard Ishida
W3C

tel: +44 1753 480 292
http://www.w3.org/International/ http://www.w3.org/People/Ishida/

Received on Sunday, 22 June 2003 20:42:52 UTC