RE: [ISSUE-22] Provenance Revision Agent

Hi Dave, all,

Just a few notes on the updated proposal:

-a) absolute path:

In the first example you us its:transRevPersonPointer=”//dc.creator/”
But that is not a path relative to selector="/html/body/par"
The same is true in the EX-trans-rev-prov-rules.xml file for the HTML5 example.


-b) DC namespace:

xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1 in the first example is part of the content, it should be an attribute of <text>.


-c) using rules for annotations:

It also seems that some of those examples, and others in the specification (including some of mine probably), are a bit unrealistic from a real-life processing viewpoint.

The idea that we would produce global rules (external or embedded) that use selectors to annotate a XML/HTML5 document seem not very practical. As soon as the document changes (for example a new <p> element is added above the existing one in this examples) the selector points to the wrong paragraph.
In other words, using rules to annotate works if the document is 'read-only'.

The main function of global rules, IMO, is to define stable information about a document, or even better, a type of document.
We started to overload this with Localization Note, where we used rules for non-local annotations.
And now in 2.0 where we have many data categories that are annotations, it seems we routinely assume that annotating a document using global rules and hard coded selectors is just fine. But I think it's often not a viable scenario in real life.
IMO annotations should be local or standoff (a local attribute points to the annotation).

My concern is that people from the HTML WG, and other reviewers, will look at this and wonder about the applicability of ITS.

Cheers,
-yves



-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Lewis [mailto:dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie] 
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 6:43 PM
To: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
Subject: Re: [ISSUE-22] Provenance Revision Agent

Apoligies, I forwarded the wrong version of this data category, please use the attached instead.
Dave

On 21/09/2012 01:29, Dave Lewis wrote:
> Hi all,
> Please find attached a revised proposal for the translation revision 
> agent provenance data category. Based on the feedback form the 
> previous call for concensus
> (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Jul
> /0256.html) and discussions with David I've made the following 
> changes:
>
> - included the pointer and refPointer variants consistent with other 
> data categories
> - to split the the global rule between transation agent proveance and 
> translation revision provence, I ended up actually splitting this into 
> two data categories. This post contains the translation_revision_ 
> agent provenance. I'll send on the other, the translation agent 
> provenance shorlty, though this will follow the same pattern
> - I allow only one value rather than multiple ones for each type of 
> agent and explicitly include attribute so the three types can be 
> differentiated - so the data types can be interpreted unambiguously
> - slimmed down the description
>
> comments welcome. One open question is whether the naming of 
> 'translationRevision' (or 'transRev') could be better named 'postedit'
> (or 'pe')?
>
> cheers,
>
> Dave
>

Received on Friday, 21 September 2012 11:34:08 UTC