I
confess that I have a guess about what "subflow" means but I don't understand
"breaking".
Regarding context, ordinarily an index entry would be
entered because it characterizes the content, so if I'm reading the objection
correctly, the translator should be able to read the content, understand the
context, and disambiguate the index term.
Regarding consistency of translations of a single term,
that seems like an issue of how to manage the translation process. For example,
if there's a term extraction phase, the translators could be provided with a
list of accepted translations of certain key terms, including index entries.
That assumes that translation is more than just a single phase
consisting of handoff and response.
Would
that approach mitigate the concern?
Bruce
-----Original Message-----
From: JoAnn Hackos
[mailto:]
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006
6:50 PM
To: Esrig, Bruce (Bruce); Chris Wong; Erik Hennum; Grosso,
Paul
Cc:
Subject: RE: [dita]
indexing question
Yes,
The Translation TC is
worried about how this will be handled. As I understand it, we would need to
treat an indexterm in the prolog differently than an indexterm in a block or
inline element. We would treat the indexterm in the prolog as a “breaking”
element and the indexterm in the text as a
subflow.
We are very
concerned that different people would be translating each index element and
would not know its context in a single topic.
JoAnn
JoAnn T. Hackos,
PhD
President
Comtech Services,
Inc.
710 Kipling Street,
Suite 400
Denver, CO
80215
303-232-7586
joannhackos
Skype
www.comtech-serv.com
From: Esrig,
Bruce (Bruce) [mailto:]
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 4:34
PM
To: JoAnn Hackos; Chris
Wong; Erik Hennum; Grosso, Paul
Cc:
Subject: RE: [dita] indexing
question
Hmm ... first thoughts
...
If there is a
mismatch, then no index entry would be generated. Such errors could
be found during proofing or acceptance of a translated text by comparing the
pre- and post-translation indexes after the translation is done and the topics
are reassembled.
>
Index entries using
<keyword> should be processed as index terms referring to the beginning
of the referenced topic.
Even though the
metadata is not above the title and shortdesc, if by some change the title and
shortdesc are alone on a page, the index entry should point to the page
containing the title or (in scrolling environments) should like to an anchor
that causes the title to be displayed at the top of the
page.
>
If you want an
index term to span a group of topics ... Question: Is this allowed at
all?
Yes. Is "do not do
this" feedback from the translation SC?
Best
wishes,
Bruce
-----Original
Message-----
From: JoAnn
Hackos [mailto:]
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 6:08
PM
To: Esrig, Bruce
(Bruce); Chris Wong; Erik Hennum; Grosso, Paul
Cc:
Subject: RE: [dita] indexing
question
Chris, Erik, and
Bruce,
I want to bring up
a concern that was discussed at last Monday’s meeting of the Translation
Subcommittee. We are working on an indexing best practice that ensures that
index terms do not interrupt sentence flow for segmentation. In the
discussion of index ranges, the translation professionals were concerned
about having to duplicate the index tag content in the start and end tags.
Please clarify for us if that is indeed the
case:
Startindexterm =
DITA and Endindexterm = DITA
The concern is that
the indexterm may not be translated exactly the same way by two different
translators working on topics in parallel or even by the same translator
working at different times on different topics. That is – if the index start
and end ranges can span topics (is that the case?).
There was also a
concern that having the same text entered twice might result in a spelling
error that would affect translation.
Here are the
recommendations that the SC has been discussing. Please let me know if there
are misconceptions.
Insert index entries that refer to entire topics
in the prolog element using the <keywords> tag
(prolog—metadata—keywords—indexterm). Index entries using <keyword>
should be processed as index terms referring to the beginning of the
referenced topic. clarify
Insert all block-level index tags immediately
following the start tag of the nearest containing block
element.
If an index term is intended to span several
elements in one topic, insert the start range at beginning of start block
(i.e., the parent block element) and the end range markup at end of the
end block element. See Chris Wong
Question: Is this allowed at all?If you want an
index term to span a group of topics, insert the start range of the index
tag in the prolog of the first topic and the end tag in the prolog of the
last topic in the DITA map. Do not do this. Prolog across multiple
topics.
Thanks for your
help, … JoAnn
JoAnn T. Hackos,
PhD
President
Comtech Services,
Inc.
710 Kipling Street,
Suite 400
Denver, CO 80215
303-232-7586
joannhackos
Skype
www.comtech-serv.com
From:
Esrig, Bruce (Bruce) [mailto:]
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 4:23
PM
To: 'Chris Wong'; Erik
Hennum; Grosso, Paul
Cc:
Subject: RE: [dita] indexing
question
Well, we may need to discuss it, but here's a
position statement.
------------
As Chris Wong
wrote, index entries are point-like by
default.
Here's a potential
accomodation.
Chris wrote: >
We can leave open
the possibility that a processor may elect to treat an indexterm in a
topic prolog as a page range: for example, if that topic is deeply nested.
This one is a
tempting accomodation, but I'll try an argument that justifies not making
this accomodation.
------------
Suppose that we are
looking at a topic with no nested
sub-topics.
When indexing the
first reference to an item, the entry should generate a point reference to
the initial point where that item enters the discussion. If the item is a
prominent item within that scope, a reference to the initial
point is sufficient, because the reader is likely to be interested in a
large fraction of the scope without being prompted by an index
entry.
If the item is a
subsidiary item in the scope and only occurs once, a reference to the
initial point is sufficient, because the item only occurs
once.
If the item is a
subsidiary item that occurs multiple times, or if the occurrences span
multiple adjacent scopes, than a page range is
appropriate.
--------------
Now applying these
guidelines to topic-level index entries
...
A topic-level index
entry is an assertion that the item is a prominent item within that scope.
The reference is to the topic as a whole, and a reference to the initial
point is sufficient.
A start-of-range
assertion at the topic level is not well defined. How do you know in a
single topic that there will be other subsequent topics that will address
the same item? Ranges are inherently appropriate for spans across contents
of a topic or contents of a grouping of
topics.
In a map, a
start-of-range assertion does make sense.
Best
wishes,
Bruce
-----Original
Message-----
From: Chris
Wong [mailto:]
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 6:05
PM
To: Erik Hennum;
Grosso, Paul
Cc:
Subject: RE: [dita] indexing
question
One question
that comes to mind is: why would you want a page range that spans one and
only one topic? For example, I pulled out my old "XML in a Nutshell" and
looked up "Arabic Unicode block". This table spans 2 pages, but is only
indexed with a page number pointing to the start of the topic. That is
because the topic is so obviously self-enclosed that a single page
reference is sufficient.
What I'd
say is that an indexterm in a topic prolog points to the topic. Page range
markers in a topic prolog has no meaning, since the indexterm is out
of the content flow. So index-range-start/index-range-end should be
ignored. This will allow an author to generate an index reference to a
single topic by entering an indexterm in the topic prolog.
We can leave
open the possibility that a processor may elect to treat an indexterm
in a topic prolog as a page range: for example, if that topic is deeply
nested.
Chris
From:
Erik Hennum [mailto:]
Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 3:08
PM
To: Grosso,
Paul
Cc:
Subject: RE: [dita] indexing
question
Hi,
Paul (Grosso) and Indexing Enthusiasts:
To follow up on the index
range question, we had a fair bit of discussion about ranges last Fall.
The consensus at the time was that ranges should be set explicitly. A
sample from the thread:
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dita/email/archives/200510/msg00020.html
I guess my perspective remains that an
indexterm in the prolog could be treated as a special case of a general
rule: that an indexterm covers the content of its container and that
processing emits a page range if the indexed container extends to more
than 2 pages.
Even so, I don't want to undo the progress we've
made:
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dita/download.php/18917/IssueNumber45b.html
Can we
isolate any anomalies in the current indexing proposal and fix those
quickly without changing the fundamental approach?
Paul, are you
aware of other hiccups besides the requirement to index an entire topic
from start of the title through the end of the related links or the end of
the nested topics?
Chris (Wong), as the lead on the indexing
proposal, do you have any suggestions?
Hoping that's
useful,
Erik Hennum
"Grosso, Paul"
<>
"Grosso, Paul"
<>
06/29/2006 05:05
PM
To
<>
cc
Subject
RE: [dita] indexing
question
From: Erik Hennum [mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, 2006 June 29
18:13
To: JoAnn
Hackos
Cc:
; Grosso, Paul
Subject: RE: [dita] indexing
question
That said, we still need a way to generate a
range over the whole topic.
Huh? I would have
thought what you just said in the first paragraph means that an indexterm
within the prolog generates a range over the whole topic. Now I'm really
confused.
