- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 16:48:44 +0200
- To: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
- CC: public-multilingualweb-lt-comments@w3.org, www International <www-international@w3.org>
Hi Richard, all, the MLW-LT WG agrees with your comment. For more info, see below. Am 16.01.13 20:42, schrieb Richard Ishida: > There was a thread on www-international > [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-international/2013JanMar/0044.html] > sparked by a comment about the relationship of its:term to dfn in > HTML5 which can be widened to a more general discussion, ie. should > the ITS spec fully describe the relationship between other elements > and and attributes in HTML5 that relate to the data categories in ITS > (see Yves' comments at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-international/2013JanMar/0044.html] > > In discussing this with Felix during the i18n WG telecon, we concluded > that ITS is trying to normatively specify relationships between HTML5 > markup and ITS data categories only where a normative and complete > relationship is tenable, ie. lang and translate attributes in HTML5 > are examples where the markup is fully consistent with ITS data > categories and cannot be used in other ways, so a normative link can > be established. > > Not all HTML5 markup can be linked to ITS so completely. For example, > its:term could be represented in HTML5 by dfn element, or by a dt > element, but either of those elements could also be used for another > purpose. HTML5 markup that can't be associated uniquely with ITS data > categories in this way will be described in the Best Practices document. > > If this is what the ITS group intends, then I think the ITS > specification needs significant editorial work to make this clearer. We wrote a dedicated section explaining the relation between ITS and HTML. See http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#usage-in-html This section should clarify everything you mentioned. > > For example, section 1.1.1 Relation to ITS 1.0 says "While ITS 1.0 > addressed only XML, ITS 2.0 specifies implementations of data > categories in both XML and HTML". And 1.1.2 New Principles says: "ITS > 2.0 data categories are intended to be format neutral, with support > for XML, HTML, and NIF: a data category implementation only needs to > support a single content format mapping in order to support a claim of > ITS 2.0 conformance". And 1.4 Usage in HTML says "ITS 2.0 adds support > for usage in HTML." These statements give the impression that ITS will > fully describe the relationships between ITS and HTML5 in the spec. > > I think it will also help to clarify, where examples related to HTML5 > appear (for example, Example 44 in the section on Terminology), that > these only illustrate some of the ways in which some of the markup in > HTML could be mapped to ITS, and do not relate to normative behaviour, > and they are not exhaustive. For these aspects, see esp. the subsection http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#html5-existing-markup-versus-its Does this reply to your concerns? Please let us know within 2 weeks whether you are OK with this response. Best, Felix
Received on Sunday, 28 April 2013 14:49:12 UTC