Re: [ACTION-211] Review Localization Quality Precis for readability from non-localisation viewpoint

Hi Yves, all,

2012/8/31 Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>

> Hi Micha,
>
> Many thanks for the feedback.
>
> > - Example 76: There is a typo. It should read “…how to use…”
> > - Example 77: Instead of “…how to us …” it should just be “…how…”
> > - Example 78: There is a typo. It should read “…how to use…”
>
> I'm too fond of copy/paste... Fixed.
>
>
> > - Example 81: The formatting of the explanation does not follow the
> usual layout
>
> I assume you mean why the attributes are not green links? Good question.
> I'm not sure. They are defined in the markup section and they have their
> <att> elements in the ODD. I'm sure I'm missing something and Felix or
> Jirka will, no doubt, enlighten us very soon on what it is.
>


The attributes in the example description missed the its- prefix needed for
HTML. In the markup declaration section the prefixes are used. I added them
now to the examples, it seems to be OK now.

Best,

Felix


>
>
> > Why is there an option to use a relative selector (pointer)
> > for the values of the rules elements? What is the benefit
> > instead of just putting the concrete values there?
>
> The global *Pointer attributes are used to allow mapping attributes or
> elements in non-ITS formats that have the same semantic, so they can be
> used instead of the ITS native vocabulary and ITS processors can still
> understand them.
>
> Some data categories don't have them because the information they carry is
> simple enough to be mapped using a simple rule. For example translate of
> HTML can be map as:
>
> <its:translateRule selector="//*[@html:translate='yes']" translate='yes'/>
>
> I don't know of any format that provide the same semantics as LQP's, but
> future formats may find it easier to define their own markup to implement
> the data category, thus defining the pointers now covers those cases.
>
> At some point it might be a good idea to review all data categories for
> consistency on this.
>
>
> > And why are these pointers not supported in the local
> > definition?
>
> Because the idea is that mapping is done at the vocabulary level. If
> HTML's translate='yes' equals its:translate='yes', it always does. So it
> can be declared once globally and is not needed locally.
>
>
> Thanks,
> -yves
>
>
>
>


-- 
Felix Sasaki
DFKI / W3C Fellow