I18n comments MWI Best Practices 1.0

Version reviewed


Main reviewers

Felix Sasaki fsasaki@w3.org

Richard Ishida


These are comments on behalf of the I18N Core WG.


IDLocation SubjectCommentOwnerEd. /
Discussion threads
1Sec. 1.2.1Working with multiple languages

Please say about the participants in the mobile value chain s.t. like "these participants are working with multiple languages ...".

2Sec. 1.3I18n in the scope of MWBP

On scope of MWBP 1.0: Please give internationalization as another example of general good practice which have a specific mobile interpretation.

3Sec. 1.3.2Localization part of usability

On aspects of usability: Please mention that proper localization is part of localizability, e.g. in the case of site usability, device usability or browser usability.

4Sec. 1.4XHTML basic

Please point to the specification XHTML Basic.

5Sec. 1.6Section 1.6

This section seems to fit better at the beginning of the document.

6Sec. 2.2Input methods

We propose to add to this section on "input" the requirement to provide an adequate input method for the user. Especially for complex scripts like Chinese or Japanese, this is a crucial requirement.

7Sec.2.3Bandwith / cost related to scripts

In some character encodings like UTF-8, scripts with a similar number of characters (e.g. latin versus indic scripts) vary in space requirements. To avoid high bandwidth / cost related to scripts, you might propose for such cases the use of the compression scheme for unicode.

8Sec. 2.4Resources for translating content

Travel related information might not be useful in a mobile context, since there might be no resource for translating. Please mention the need to make it explicit in the content that such resources are missing.

9Sec. 2.7Line break correction

Please correct the line break before "communications.".

10Sec. 2.7Developing countries and i18n/l10n requirements

Your mention the importance of mobile devices for developing countries. Esp. for these countries, internationalization and localization issues are crucial (e.g. support of a font for the script). such requirements should be made explicit in this document.

11GeneralNo normative references?

You don't have any normative references. Is this intended, and if yes, why?

12GeneralRelation between sec. 4.2 and actual best practice statements

In sec. 4.2, you describe the structure of Best Practice Statements". Nevertheless, many Best Practice Statements leave parts of this structure out. Will this be changed in a future version of this document?

13GeneralReferences in the text / in the reference list

CDFWG is in the references, but not in the text.

14Sec. 5.2.7Indicating language changes in links

Please mention that if in the content there is a link to something which is not in the same language, it would be good to make it explicit.

15GeneralReference to UAProf

UAProf is mentioned several times in the text, but not in the references. We guess you mean UAProf profile repository.

16Sec. 5.4.12HTTP charset reference

Please refer to the tutorial on Character sets & encoding in XHTML, HTML and CSS, and the QA on Setting encoding in web authoring applications, instead of the "HTTP charset" document.

17Sec. standard messages in a mobile device

"Please consider proposing that it would help bandwidth to store standard messages in the device itself, rather than download them each time."

185.4.12No mention of meta charset

The section mentions the use of the XML declaration for declaring in-document the encoding of XML documents, but makes no mention of the standard in-document declaration of encoding for HTML documents or XHTML served as text/html, which uses the Content-Type meta element. This seems a strange omission. Please add text describing this.

195.4.12Machine test

The document doesn't say that the encoding should be expressed using the HTTP header, so the test should not assume that either. It should probably say something along the lines of "Check that the encoding is declared. This could be done in the HTTP header or the XML declaration for documents served as XML, or in the HTTP header or the Content-Type meta element for documents served as HTML, or in the HTTP header or the @charset statement for CSS stylesheets."

205.5.1Language declaration

"Specification of the natural language in use assists with predictive text input."

It is unclear to us whether this refers to standard mechanisms in X/HTML to declare language, or to a declaration specific to input modes. That should be made clearer. (If you were referring to input mode settings, we feel it would also be useful to encourage declaration of the language used in content using standard mechanisms, since that assists with not only predictive text input, but also styling, font selection, etc.)

Whatever the above refers to, this section contains no other information about how to do it, and how to test for it. This should be added.

(The i18n tutorial Declaring Language in XHTML and HTML may be helpful here for you to understand what i mean by 'standard mechanisms...'.)

21GeneralSupport Unicode

We believe the document should encourage all participants in the mobile value chain to support Unicode. This is extremely helpful in ensuring international use of this technology and ease of localization of content.


Version: $Id: Overview.html,v 1.12 2006/05/09 06:08:39 fsasaki Exp $