Re: [Comment on ITS WD] Richard's editorial comments on ITS

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Comment on ITS WD] Richard's editorial comments on ITS

Yves Savourel-2

Hello Richard, all

This is a reply on behalf of the i18n ITS working group. See also
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3516 for our discussion.

Thank you very much for your comments. They were very useful.
We agreed to implement most of them. Please have a look at:
http://www.w3.org/International/its/itstagset/itstagset.html#introduction
http://www.w3.org/International/its/itstagset/itstagset.html#basic-concepts
http://www.w3.org/International/its/itstagset/itstagset.html#notation-terminology
http://www.w3.org/International/its/itstagset/itstagset.html#datacategory-description


Out of the 45 comments about 3 have not been implemented as proposed, and a few others are not applicable anymore because of other
changes (i.e. the text was re-done when resolving other issues). The comments that have not led to the proposed changes are:


> Section 1
> It's not immediately obvious which examples relate to which bullet points
> - you have to check.  It would be much better to do something like add
> "(Example X)" at the end of each line, to associate the point with the
> right example. (Note that you can easily refer to examples by number using
> the i18n version of the xmlspec dtd, by pointing to the id of the example
> in a specref element.)
YS> I think it looks OK now.


> Section 1.5
> "literate programming language"
> meaning?
YS> See e.g. http://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~uno/lp.html I think the term is reasonably well-known and understood so that we
don't have to define it. Note also that its understanding is not important for the specification (this part simply describes about
how the specification was created).


> Section 2
> I think the "To summarize" paragraph repeats info we've heard before,
> so I didn't appreciate it in this location.  However, I thought it might
> be useful to set this out near the beginning of section 2, rather than
> here - especially since this isn't the end of the section.
YS> I agree that it's a repeat. Looking at the other changes in this section, it seems a bit useless now. So I've simply removed it.


Please let us know within 2 weeks if you are satisfied. If we don't hear  from you , we will assume this issue as closed.

Regards,
-yves


The original comments are here:

> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-i18n-comments/2006Jul/0000.html
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-i18n-comments/2006Jul/0001.html
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-i18n-comments/2006Jul/0002.html
>
> We took the following decision on these comments, see
> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/17-i18nits-minutes.html#item01 :
>
> [[
> Yves: everbody at the last call agreed in leaving them to the editors
> ... so we skip over them now, to gain some time
> Richard: sounds good to me
> Felix: me as well]]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: [Comment on ITS WD] Richard's editorial comments on ITS

r12a


Thankyou for doing all this.

I'm Satisfied.

RI

============
Richard Ishida
Internationalization Lead
W3C (World Wide Web Consortium)

http://www.w3.org/People/Ishida/
http://www.w3.org/International/
http://people.w3.org/rishida/blog/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ishida/
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yves Savourel [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: 11 September 2006 15:56
> To: 'Richard Ishida'
> Subject: Re: [Comment on ITS WD] Richard's editorial comments on ITS
>
> Hello Richard, all
>
> This is a reply on behalf of the i18n ITS working group. See also
> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3516 for our discussion.
>
> Thank you very much for your comments. They were very useful.
> We agreed to implement most of them. Please have a look at:
> http://www.w3.org/International/its/itstagset/itstagset.html#i
> ntroduction
> http://www.w3.org/International/its/itstagset/itstagset.html#b
> asic-concepts
> http://www.w3.org/International/its/itstagset/itstagset.html#n
> otation-terminology
> http://www.w3.org/International/its/itstagset/itstagset.html#d
> atacategory-description
>
>
> Out of the 45 comments about 3 have not been implemented as
> proposed, and a few others are not applicable anymore because
> of other changes (i.e. the text was re-done when resolving
> other issues). The comments that have not led to the proposed
> changes are:
>
>
> > Section 1
> > It's not immediately obvious which examples relate to which bullet
> > points
> > - you have to check.  It would be much better to do
> something like add
> > "(Example X)" at the end of each line, to associate the
> point with the
> > right example. (Note that you can easily refer to examples
> by number
> > using the i18n version of the xmlspec dtd, by pointing to the id of
> > the example in a specref element.)
> YS> I think it looks OK now.
>
>
> > Section 1.5
> > "literate programming language"
> > meaning?
> YS> See e.g. http://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~uno/lp.html 
> I think the
> YS> term is reasonably well-known and understood so that we
> don't have to define it. Note also that its understanding is
> not important for the specification (this part simply
> describes about how the specification was created).
>
>
> > Section 2
> > I think the "To summarize" paragraph repeats info we've
> heard before,
> > so I didn't appreciate it in this location.  However, I thought it
> > might be useful to set this out near the beginning of section 2,
> > rather than here - especially since this isn't the end of
> the section.
> YS> I agree that it's a repeat. Looking at the other changes
> in this section, it seems a bit useless now. So I've simply
> removed it.
>
>
> Please let us know within 2 weeks if you are satisfied. If we
> don't hear  from you , we will assume this issue as closed.
>
> Regards,
> -yves
>
>
> The original comments are here:
> >
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-i18n-comments/2006Jul/0000.htm
> > l
> >
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-i18n-comments/2006Jul/0001.htm
> > l
> >
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-i18n-comments/2006Jul/0002.htm
> > l
> >
> > We took the following decision on these comments, see
> > http://www.w3.org/2006/07/17-i18nits-minutes.html#item01 :
> >
> > [[
> > Yves: everbody at the last call agreed in leaving them to
> the editors
> > ... so we skip over them now, to gain some time
> > Richard: sounds good to me
> > Felix: me as well]]
>