On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 2:58 AM, Bruce D'Arcus <[email protected]> wrote:
> So am totally not following this. Can someone boil down the
> implications for the 1.0.1 discussion?

This is cross-talk, not relevant to the immediate 1.0.1 discussion.
Nice solution, though. I'll open a ticket for it in the schema
tracker.

>
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 5:47 AM, Sylvester Keil <[email protected]> wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>>
>> On Apr 29, 2011, at 10:50 AM, Frank Bennett wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Sylvester Keil <[email protected]> 
>>> wrote:
>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Apr 28, 2011, at 7:35 PM, Rintze Zelle wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Bruce D'Arcus <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> You're saying you want to fold in a backward-incompatible feature
>>>>> addition with a bug fix release?
>>>>>
>>>>> In this context, backward-compatibility is the ability of a CSL 1.0.1 
>>>>> processor to handle CSL 1.0 styles and locales, right? Then only the bug 
>>>>> fix is backward-incompatible (as defining gender-specific ordinals in the 
>>>>> CSL locales will always be optional).
>>>>
>>>> Because you brought up ordinals, I would just like to add that I think 
>>>> Rintze is absolutely right in that including the gender support for 
>>>> locales will not lead to issues for CSL 1.0 processor processing 1.0 
>>>> locales. Furthermore, it is not difficult for 1.0.1 processors to handle 
>>>> 1.0 locales; judging from some of the citeproc-tests I believe that the 
>>>> proposal is implemented in citeproc-js already? I definitely and to 
>>>> implement gender support for some of the tests to pass.
>>>>
>>>> However, there was another issue I had to address in citeproc-ruby. For 
>>>> illustrations purposes, you can take a look at the test cases here:
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/inukshuk/citeproc-ruby/blob/master/spec/csl/locale_spec.rb
>>>>
>>>> The relevant tests are for '#ordinalize', lines 85 through 159. As you can 
>>>> see on lines 92 and 100, I would expect  3 to become 3rd, 13 to become 
>>>> 13th, 23 to become 23rd. This does not work with CSL 1.0 because I can 
>>>> only specify the ordinals 1-4 (13 would probably become 13rd here). What's 
>>>> more, I would expect that in different languages all kinds of exceptions 
>>>> are possible which lead to similar problems.
>>>>
>>>> My implementation currently addresses this as follows:
>>>>
>>>> Given a a number X to ordinalize, I check the locales, following the 
>>>> normal prioritization, for a definition of X; if X is not defined, the 
>>>> process is repeated for Y = X  % mod where mod currently starts at 100 and 
>>>> is divided by 10 in every consecutive step. Therefore, to ordinalize 1155 
>>>> I would try to look up the following terms until there is a match:
>>>>
>>>> ordinal-1155
>>>> ordinal-55
>>>> ordinal-05
>>>> ordinal-00
>>>>
>>>> To ordinalize 113 the look-up would be for:
>>>>
>>>> ordinal-113
>>>> ordinal-13
>>>> ordinal-03
>>>> ordinal-00
>>>>
>>>> So, as you can see, for English, I would have to define the following 
>>>> minimal set of ordinals to cover all cases (that I can think of right now):
>>>>
>>>> ordinal-00 = 'th'
>>>> ordinal-01 = 'st'
>>>> ordinal-02 = 'nd'
>>>> ordinal-03 = 'rd'
>>>> ordinal-11 = 'th'
>>>> ordinal-12 = 'th'
>>>> ordinal-13 = 'th'
>>>>
>>>> In the two examples above 1155 becomes 1155th and 113 becomes 113th, 
>>>> whereas using a CSL 1.0 locale the algorithm would return 1155th and 113rd 
>>>> which is wrong but consistent, I think, with CSL 1.0 expectations. That is 
>>>> to say, allowing locales to define any number as an ordinal term should 
>>>> not alter the behaviour of CSL 1.0 processors at all; furthermore, the 
>>>> results of a processor using the above algorithm when using 1.0 locales is 
>>>> consistent with current implementations, too.
>>>
>>> Sylvester,
>>>
>>> Nice. So the idea is to use a fixed algorithm, and to control it by
>>> defining match-points in the locale files that will yield that right
>>> result for the language? This sounds very interesting.
>>
>> Exactly. This way, each locale can decide which match-points to define; for 
>> example, German would only have to define ordinal-00 = '.'; we could include 
>> long-forms in this process, too, so that it is up to each locale which 
>> long-forms to define. The algorithm is fixed in the sense, that it assumes 
>> the number system uses a base 10; perhaps we could allow for a locale to 
>> specify the modulus too?
>>
>> Sylvester
>>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (Darwin)
>>
>> iEYEARECAAYFAk26iR4ACgkQh4kzvOqyWhAwZgCeO8Y2Dvjc5ivBndCbDAMNjxpF
>> DsAAoMgDf9OQzOV8Mgu2Iyckit16zjEG
>> =LWOE
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> WhatsUp Gold - Download Free Network Management Software
>> The most intuitive, comprehensive, and cost-effective network
>> management toolset available today.  Delivers lowest initial
>> acquisition cost and overall TCO of any competing solution.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/whatsupgold-sd
>> _______________________________________________
>> xbiblio-devel mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xbiblio-devel
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> WhatsUp Gold - Download Free Network Management Software
> The most intuitive, comprehensive, and cost-effective network
> management toolset available today.  Delivers lowest initial
> acquisition cost and overall TCO of any competing solution.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/whatsupgold-sd
> _______________________________________________
> xbiblio-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xbiblio-devel
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WhatsUp Gold - Download Free Network Management Software
The most intuitive, comprehensive, and cost-effective network 
management toolset available today.  Delivers lowest initial 
acquisition cost and overall TCO of any competing solution.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/whatsupgold-sd
_______________________________________________
xbiblio-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xbiblio-devel

Reply via email to