Re: [widgets] i18n span element VS unicode RLM/LRM
Hi Felix (and i18n Core),
During our last WAF teleconf, WebApps decided to adopt your
suggestions (below). I've been attempting to integrate your
suggestions into the Widget Packaging spec [1]. Below I summarize what
draft text I have added thus far. I would really appreciate any
feedback if you think I've gone about specifying what you intended
correctly.
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 1:32 AM, Felix Sasaki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Marcos Caceres wrote:
Hi, i18n-WG.
In recent feedback we received from Addison Phillips regarding the
Widgets 1.0: Packaging specification, he suggested that WebApps should
add a span-like element to our Widget Configuration Document format
(so to allow bidi text to be declared).
I think such an element would only be necessary within these elements: name,
description, author, license. It seems that only these elements may contain
human readable text.
Agreed. More on this below.
snip
I personally would recommend you to use the its:span element in the ITS
namespace. The element is defined at
http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/REC-its-20070403/#span
This element gives you the dir attribute and various other attributes
which are useful for esp. Widgets localization. See
http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/REC-its-20070403/#att.local.no-ns.attributes
See also the related Best Practice to define such an element for XML
vocabularies at
http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-xml-i18n-bp-20080213/#DevSpan
To keep simplicity for Widgets 1.0, you could say in your conformance
description that a Widgets processor has various options to deal with the
its:span element (or more in general: the ITS namespace) and its
attributes: ignore them or process them.
Ok, in the Widget User Agent conformance section I've added the
following text for your consideration:
A widget user agent MAY support the Internationalized Tag Set's
its:span element and the its:dir attribute [ITS]. Support of any
other ITS elements and attributes is NOT REQUIRED. Although this
specification specifies the elements of the configuration document in
which its:span and its:dir can be used (below), it does not define
how they are to be interpreted and processed by a widget user agent.
If a widget user agent implements its:span and its:dir, then they
MUST do so in conformance to the processing rules defined by the ITS
specification.
Then I've added the following subsection to the Configuration Document
section...
== Indicating text directionality and its:span ==
Although it is optional for a widget user agent to implement [ITS],
authors are may use the its:span element to indicate the
directionality of arbitrary content. Directionality is indicated by
using the its:dir attribute in conjunction with the its:span
element. The its:dir accepts one of the following values, as defined
in [ITS]:
dir=ltr - left to right text
dir=rtl - right to left text
dir=lro - left-to-right override
dir=rlo - right-to-left override
For example,
widget
xmlns=http://www.w3.org/ns/widgets;
xmlns:its=http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its;
nameYay for the its:span dir=rtlمتعة الأسماك!/its:span
Widget/name
/widget
The its:span element can be only be used as a child of the following
elements of the configuration document:
* name
* description
* author
* license
If you do not want to add markup from a specific namespace, you could or
should IMO add extensibility points for people who need such markup. That
is, change in the schema something like
description = element description {
xmllang.att?,
text
}
to
description = element description {
xmllang.att?,
any
}
and define any and a pattern anyElement as
any= (attribute * { text }
| text
| anyElement)*
anyElement = element * { any }
Again the conformance for such markup can say: ignore it (it meaning:
markup from other namespaces) or process it. I think you are basically
saying that already at http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets/#extensions
Agreed. Our schema will be updated to include the above.
Thank you again for your help! And looking forward to hearing any
feedback you might have,
Marcos
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
Re: [widgets] i18n span element VS unicode RLM/LRM
Hi Marcos,
thank you very much for your response. I am happy with your resolution.
One comment below
Marcos Caceres さんは書きました:
Hi Felix (and i18n Core),
During our last WAF teleconf, WebApps decided to adopt your
suggestions (below). I've been attempting to integrate your
suggestions into the Widget Packaging spec [1]. Below I summarize what
draft text I have added thus far. I would really appreciate any
feedback if you think I've gone about specifying what you intended
correctly.
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 1:32 AM, Felix Sasaki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Marcos Caceres wrote:
Hi, i18n-WG.
In recent feedback we received from Addison Phillips regarding the
Widgets 1.0: Packaging specification, he suggested that WebApps should
add a span-like element to our Widget Configuration Document format
(so to allow bidi text to be declared).
I think such an element would only be necessary within these elements: name,
description, author, license. It seems that only these elements may contain
human readable text.
Agreed. More on this below.
snip
I personally would recommend you to use the its:span element in the ITS
namespace. The element is defined at
http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/REC-its-20070403/#span
This element gives you the dir attribute and various other attributes
which are useful for esp. Widgets localization. See
http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/REC-its-20070403/#att.local.no-ns.attributes
See also the related Best Practice to define such an element for XML
vocabularies at
http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-xml-i18n-bp-20080213/#DevSpan
To keep simplicity for Widgets 1.0, you could say in your conformance
description that a Widgets processor has various options to deal with the
its:span element (or more in general: the ITS namespace) and its
attributes: ignore them or process them.
Ok, in the Widget User Agent conformance section I've added the
following text for your consideration:
A widget user agent MAY support the Internationalized Tag Set's
its:span element and the its:dir attribute [ITS]. Support of any
other ITS elements and attributes is NOT REQUIRED. Although this
specification specifies the elements of the configuration document in
which its:span and its:dir can be used (below), it does not define
how they are to be interpreted and processed by a widget user agent.
If a widget user agent implements its:span and its:dir, then they
MUST do so in conformance to the processing rules defined by the ITS
specification.
Then I've added the following subsection to the Configuration Document
section...
== Indicating text directionality and its:span ==
Although it is optional for a widget user agent to implement [ITS],
authors are may use the its:span element to indicate the
directionality of arbitrary content. Directionality is indicated by
using the its:dir attribute in conjunction with the its:span
element. The its:dir accepts one of the following values, as defined
in [ITS]:
dir=ltr - left to right text
dir=rtl - right to left text
dir=lro - left-to-right override
dir=rlo - right-to-left override
For example,
widget
xmlns=http://www.w3.org/ns/widgets;
xmlns:its=http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its;
nameYay for the its:span dir=rtlمتعة الأسماك!/its:span
Widget/name
/widget
The its:span element can be only be used as a child of the following
elements of the configuration document:
* name
* description
* author
* license
If you do not want to add markup from a specific namespace, you could or
should IMO add extensibility points for people who need such markup. That
is, change in the schema something like
description = element description {
xmllang.att?,
text
}
to
description = element description {
xmllang.att?,
any
}
and define any and a pattern anyElement as
any= (attribute * { text }
| text
| anyElement)*
anyElement = element * { any }
after looking at this again I am thinking you could also say:
any= (attribute * - w:* { text }
| text
| anyElement)*
anyElement = element * - w:* { any }
-w:* (assuming that the w prefix is bound to the widgets namespace)
means that you exclude native widgets markup from the any defintions.
That is just a suggestion, no need to handle this as a formal comments.
Regards, Felix.
Again the conformance for such markup can say: ignore it (it meaning:
markup from other namespaces) or process it. I think you are basically
saying that already at http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets/#extensions
Agreed. Our schema will be updated to include the above.
Thank you again for your help! And looking forward to hearing any
feedback you might have,
Marcos
Re: [widgets] i18n span element VS unicode RLM/LRM
Hi Felix,
I've passed your schema related comments to our schema maintainer
(David Håsäther, CC'd). Unless David has any comments, objections or
modifications, I would expect to see your recommendations in the
schema in the next publication.
Thanks again!
On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 12:49 AM, Felix Sasaki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
after looking at this again I am thinking you could also say:
any= (attribute * - w:* { text }
| text
| anyElement)*
anyElement = element * - w:* { any }
-w:* (assuming that the w prefix is bound to the widgets namespace)
means that you exclude native widgets markup from the any defintions. That
is just a suggestion, no need to handle this as a formal comments.
Regards, Felix.
Kind regards,
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
[widgets] i18n span element VS unicode RLM/LRM
Hi, i18n-WG. In recent feedback we received from Addison Phillips regarding the Widgets 1.0: Packaging specification, he suggested that WebApps should add a span-like element to our Widget Configuration Document format (so to allow bidi text to be declared). At our last F2F, WebApps discussed the proposition and we were left wondering if we can use unicode's RLM/LRM characters instead of a span-like element? Can i18n please advise us on this? Not having the span-like element significantly simplifies our processing model. We don't want to sacrifice i18n for the sake of simplicity, so we really need your guidance again on how to move forward. Having read Internationalization Best Practices: Handling Right-to-left Scripts in XHTML and HTML Content, we are aware that there are problems with text editors ATM, but we are hoping the tools will improve as Unicode support becomes more common place (or is that wishful thinking?). Kind regards, Marcos -- Marcos Caceres http://datadriven.com.au
Re: [widgets] i18n span element VS unicode RLM/LRM
Hello Marcos,
many people from the i18n core WG are away this week, so there might be
more replies later. This is a personal reply.
Marcos Caceres wrote:
Hi, i18n-WG.
In recent feedback we received from Addison Phillips regarding the
Widgets 1.0: Packaging specification, he suggested that WebApps should
add a span-like element to our Widget Configuration Document format
(so to allow bidi text to be declared).
I think such an element would only be necessary within these elements:
name, description, author, license. It seems that only these elements
may contain human readable text.
At our last F2F, WebApps discussed the proposition and we were left
wondering if we can use unicode's RLM/LRM characters instead of a
span-like element? Can i18n please advise us on this?
See
http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-xml-i18n-bp-20080213/#DevDir
and
http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/NOTE-unicode-xml-20070516/#Bidi
I will not repeat the arguments here, but the conclusion is that indeed
an attribute for directionality information would be better than relying
on Unicode control characters.
Not having the
span-like element significantly simplifies our processing model. We
don't want to sacrifice i18n for the sake of simplicity, so we really
need your guidance again on how to move forward.
I personally would recommend you to use the its:span element in the
ITS namespace. The element is defined at
http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/REC-its-20070403/#span
This element gives you the dir attribute and various other attributes
which are useful for esp. Widgets localization. See
http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/REC-its-20070403/#att.local.no-ns.attributes
See also the related Best Practice to define such an element for XML
vocabularies at
http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-xml-i18n-bp-20080213/#DevSpan
To keep simplicity for Widgets 1.0, you could say in your conformance
description that a Widgets processor has various options to deal with
the its:span element (or more in general: the ITS namespace) and its
attributes: ignore them or process them.
If you do not want to add markup from a specific namespace, you could or
should IMO add extensibility points for people who need such markup.
That is, change in the schema something like
description = element description {
xmllang.att?,
text
}
to
description = element description {
xmllang.att?,
any
}
and define any and a pattern anyElement as
any= (attribute * { text }
| text
| anyElement)*
anyElement = element * { any }
Again the conformance for such markup can say: ignore it (it meaning:
markup from other namespaces) or process it. I think you are basically
saying that already at http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets/#extensions
Regards, Felix.
Having read Internationalization Best Practices: Handling
Right-to-left Scripts in XHTML and HTML Content, we are aware that
there are problems with text editors ATM, but we are hoping the tools
will improve as Unicode support becomes more common place (or is that
wishful thinking?).
Kind regards,
Marcos
