search

w3c / a11y-discov-vocab

Repository for the maintenance of the schema.org accessibility property values for discoverability.
https://www.w3.org/community/a11y-discov-vocab/
Other
15 stars 8 forks source link

Add a new sebsection "Internationalization Term". #79

Closed murata2makoto closed 1 year ago

murata2makoto commented 1 year ago

This PR is meant to address #2, #3, and #68. The proposed subsection contains terms for ruby annotations, horizontal/vertical writing, and additional word segmentation.

Preview | Diff

mattgarrish commented 1 year ago

I am wondering about the name of this section

I think it's fine for now. If we get more terms we can perhaps look at breaking them out into more specialized groups.

danbri commented 1 year ago

Hi folks

I see a flurry of messages from Github - anything we can do on the Schema.org side to help here?

On Thu, 22 Jun 2023 at 14:07, Matt Garrish @.***> wrote:

@.**** commented on this pull request.

In index.html https://github.com/w3c/a11y-discov-vocab/pull/79#discussion_r1238498117:

  • Internationalization Terms

  • The internationalization terms identify content characteristics dedicated to internationalization.
  • fullRubyAnnotations
  • cates that
  • href="https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/text-level-semantics.html#the-ruby-element"

  • ruby annotations [[HTML]] are attached to every CJK

  • ideographic character in the content. Ruby annotations are used as pronunciation guides
  • for the logographic characters for languages like Chinese or Japanese. They make difficult
  • CJK ideographic characters more accessible.

  • If some but not all CJK ideographic characters have ruby annotations, use "rubyAnnotations" instead.

Better to link the definitions. ⬇️ Suggested change

  • If some but not all CJK ideographic characters have ruby annotations, use "rubyAnnotations" instead.
  • If some but not all CJK ideographic characters have ruby annotations, use rubyAnnotations instead.

In index.html https://github.com/w3c/a11y-discov-vocab/pull/79#discussion_r1238501981:

  • horizontal-tb writing mode of [[[css-writing-modes-3]]).

  • ome languages such as Japanese and Chinese, it is possible to both vertically and horizontally
  • lay out the same text. However, contents written in these languages may be fixed to either
  • vertical or horizontal writing.
  • rubyAnnotations
  • cates that
  • href="https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/text-level-semantics.html#the-ruby-element"

  • ruby annotations [[HTML]] are attached to some but not all

  • CJK ideographic characters in the content.

    • Would be good to similarly link this to the full ruby definition so people are aware of both. Something like: ⬇️ Suggested change

    - +

    — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/w3c/a11y-discov-vocab/pull/79#pullrequestreview-1493141359, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABJSGIDV3IM3RZXDGHOPY3XMQ7Q3ANCNFSM6AAAAAAZOOE22A . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: @.***>

    clapierre commented 1 year ago

    Hi @danbri I think we are good, just organizing these to make it easier for the various values to be grouped together in a logical order. Also adding some additional values to the accessibilityFeatures property for Internationalization support for RubyAnnotations.

    murata2makoto commented 1 year ago

    @mattgarrish Thanks. I incorporated your suggestion and did some other minor improvements.

    mattgarrish commented 1 year ago

    Based on the discussion in the issue, it might be good to note in both definitions that the property should only be set for languages that are commonly written in both directions. We don't want every publication in a Romance language, for example, stating it has horizontal writing.

    madeleinerothberg commented 1 year ago

    Sorry for the delay -- I am just back from vacation.

    Would it make sense to make it clearer that these terms relate to accessibility? Possibly, in the intro to the section, a phrase to say these are terms about internationalization that also impact accessibility. And for each term, is it possible to mention the accessibility impact as a couple of them do already?

    I suggest this because there are probably lots of other internationalization values that could be recorded but that aren't relevant to accessibility.

    murata2makoto commented 1 year ago

    @madeleinerothberg Thanks. Done.

    madeleinerothberg commented 1 year ago

    At the risk of nitpicking... are these, as currently described:

    those accessibility characteristics of the content which are required for internationalization

    Or could they be better described as:

    those internationalization characteristics of the content which are required for accessibility (or are important for accessibility, or contribute to...)

    I don't know enough about internationalization -- ignore me if the original is better.

    murata2makoto commented 1 year ago

    @madeleinerothberg

    It is the Japan DAISY consortium that proposed this subsection. To JDC, the values in this subsection are accessibility characteristics, which are not addressed by the current draft. I thus much prefer my wording.

    P.S. "internationalization characteristics" does not make a lot of sense to me. "accessibility characteristics" can certainly be internationalized.

    madeleinerothberg commented 1 year ago

    OK -- accepted as written.