- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 08:38:28 +0900
- To: www-i18n-comments@w3.org
- Cc: connolly@w3.org (Dan Connolly)
This is a last call comment from Dan Connolly (connolly@w3.org) on
the Character Model for the World Wide Web 1.0
(http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-charmod-20020430/).
Semi-structured version of the comment:
Submitted by: Dan Connolly (connolly@w3.org)
Submitted on behalf of (maybe empty):
Comment type: substantive
Chapter/section the comment applies to: 3.7 Summary
The comment will be visible to: public
Comment title: define 'character' once and for all
Comment:
Regarding...
C010 [S] When specifications use the term 'character' the specifications MUST define which meaning they intend.
How is a choice of definitions of this term useful?
Please let charmod export exactly one definition of the term "character". If you're going to speak of conformance of other specifications to this one,
let conforming specifications use exactly that one definition.
The definitions in section 3.7 look OK, to me; to wit:
a character can be defined informally as a small logical unit of text. Text is then defined as sequences of characters.
That occurrence of 'character' should be marked up specially,
not the previous one ("The term character is used differently in a variety of contexts ...")
Structured version of the comment:
<lc-comment
visibility="public" status="pending"
decision="pending" impact="substantive" id="LC-">
<originator email="connolly@w3.org"
>Dan Connolly</originator>
<represents email=""
>-</represents>
<charmod-section href='http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-charmod-20040225/#sec-PerceptionsOutro'
>3.7</charmod-section>
<title>define 'character' once and for all</title>
<description>
<comment>
<dated-link date="2004-03-18"
href="http://www.w3.org/mid/257685391.20040318233828@toro.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp"
>define 'character' once and for all</dated-link>
<para>Regarding...
C010 [S] When specifications use the term 'character' the specifications MUST define which meaning they intend.
How is a choice of definitions of this term useful?
Please let charmod export exactly one definition of the term "character". If you're going to speak of conformance of other specifications to this one,
let conforming specifications use exactly that one definition.
The definitions in section 3.7 look OK, to me; to wit:
a character can be defined informally as a small logical unit of text. Text is then defined as sequences of characters.
That occurrence of 'character' should be marked up specially,
not the previous one ("The term character is used differently in a variety of contexts ...")
</para>
</comment>
</description>
</lc-comment>
Received on Thursday, 18 March 2004 18:38:30 UTC