New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Revisions for the copy relating to the term “西文” per issue #483 #492
Conversation
To fix issue w3c#483. * Unify the Chinese term usage of 西文 and 西文字母. * Translate 西文 into “European text”. * Translate 西文字母 into “European alphabet”. * Translate 阿拉伯数字 into “European numeral(s)”. * Some minor fixes for typos, punctuations, and translations. * Remove some unnecessary divergencies between TC & SC. The lines with `checkme` marks are need to be confirmed.
和Richard讨论后,他有几点建议,供大家参考:
|
我先提出几点供讨论:
——Alphanumeric(s) 在语感上似乎侧重强调「同时包含字母和数字」的内容(比如十六进制数字、车牌号码)。
——Script(s) 中文一般译作「文字」「文种」,它所指的对象覆盖了字母、数字、符号等各种字符。在「European alphabet」的上下文中,该术语是明确跟「数字」这个概念并列的。
——ASCII digits 这个术语在字面上非常强调某一编码字符集(也即 ASCII 字符集)。 |
虽然可能有这种感觉,但只包含字母或只包含数字的一段文字也可以算alphanumeric(s)。另见Infra的定义。
Richard的另一个建议是使用European alpha,因为alphabet指的是「字母表」,用在文档中不太自然。Infra也有类似的定义。
这一点他也很清楚,不过他目前也没找到更好的词了。如果我们觉得把阿拉伯数字和「欧洲」挂钩没关系的话,用European numeral(s)也是可以的,毕竟Unicode也在用这个词。 |
结合 Infra 的定义,「a European alpha」应该相当于「a letter of/in European alphabet(s)」。从这个角度来说,European alpha 确实利于优化英语措辞,我也觉得是更好的术语方案。 我也看到 Unicode 在优先使用 European digit(s) 这个术语。 对于 ASCII,我最大的顾虑是它容易像「半角/全角」这组术语一样,把字符造型、字符编码和历史遗留的「代称/借代」混淆在一起。CLReq 在提到阿拉伯数字时,并不预设数字是比例宽度的、全宽的甚至其他形态的,也即,数字实际上有可能超出 U+0030–U+0039 这个范围。 ——基于这些考虑,个人更倾向于 European numeral(s) 或 European digit(s)。 Alphanumeric(s) 可以再看看其他几位编辑的意见。 关于 alphanumeric(s) 个人有个额外提议:可以考虑将大多数「西文字母和数字」这个中文短语,整体翻译成「alphanumeric(s)」。因为文档中涉及「西文字母和数字」的排版规则,除少数个例外,通常不必严格区分「西文字母」「阿拉伯数字」——它们的排版规则基本是一致的。 基于上述,alphanumeric(s) 作为术语,或许是「letter(s) of European alphabets and numerals」的合理简化。 |
* Translate “西文字母” into “European alpha(s)”. * Use “alphanumeric(s)” to shorten some wording.
Change “an” into “a” since “European” begins with a consonant.
index.html
Outdated
@@ -1407,7 +1407,7 @@ <h5> | |||
<p its-locale-filter-list="zh-hant" lang="zh-hant">句號<span class="uname" translate="no">U+3002 IDEOGRAPHIC FULL STOP </span>[。]表示語句結束,逗號<span class="uname" translate="no">U+FF0C FULLWIDTH COMMA </span>[,]表示語氣停頓,頓號<span class="uname" translate="no">U+3001 IDEOGRAPHIC COMMA</span> [、]使用於並列連用、表示次序的字詞之間。</p> | |||
|
|||
<div class="note" id="n021"> | |||
<p its-locale-filter-list="en" lang="en">In many college textbooks, science and technology literature, and grammar books of Western languages for example, most of which are in horizontal writing mode, where Western language are heavily used. In these cases, <span class="uname" translate="no">U+FF0E FULLWIDTH FULL STOP</span> [.] can be used as periods, while <span class="uname" translate="no">U+002C COMMA</span> [,] or <span class="uname" translate="no">U+FF0C FULLWIDTH COMMA</span> [,] can be used as commas or secondary commas.</p> | |||
<p its-locale-filter-list="en" lang="en" class="checkme">In many college textbooks, science and technology literature, and grammar books in European text for example, most of which are in horizontal writing mode, where European text are heavily used. In these cases, <span class="uname" translate="no">U+FF0E FULLWIDTH FULL STOP</span> [.] can be used as periods, while <span class="uname" translate="no">U+002C COMMA</span> [,] or <span class="uname" translate="no">U+FF0C FULLWIDTH COMMA</span> [,] can be used as commas or secondary commas.</p> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just wondering whether 'non-Chinese' might be better than 'European', since that would also capture Uighur, Tibetan, and other languages.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The “European” here is aimed to translate the Chinese “西(文)”, of which the Japanese counterpart is “欧(文)”. The adoptions of 欧文 can also be found in Taiwan’s typographical publications.
The “欧” above is literally the “European”.
Traditionally, “西(文)” would be translated into “Western”. Yet, the final agreement from CLReq editors’ meeting was to replace the “Western” with the “European”, in order to get away from some potential controversies about the border between the East and the West (or something geopolitical).
Personally, the script set which the term “non-Chinese” refers appears to be much larger than that the “Western” or “European” refers. Considering the Chinese term “西文” usually refers to the scripts like Latin (and Latin extended), Cyrillic, Greek, etc., I also prefer “European” more than “non-Chinese”.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the explanation of the background - of which i was aware. But i suggest 'non-Chinese' in the interest of accuracy, rather than 'political' considerations. It seems like the behaviour of the features under discussion may not be limited to supporting languages of Europe(?)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you, Richard. Will discuss this issue with other editors.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I discussed this with @r12a offline. He suggested that we use "Latin, Greek, and Cyrillic" directly, or use a phrase like "simple alphabetic text" (with a definition in the document).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
At yesterday's meeting, we decided to change "European" back to "Western".
Sorry for suggesting alternative wordings so late in the day, but it's the first time i had a chance to look at the usage in context. I hope it's more of a help than a hindrance. |
Per CLReq editors’ meeting on 21 Feb 2023.
✅ Deploy Preview for clreq ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site settings. |
Per CLReq editors’ meeting on 21 Feb 2023.
Per CLReq editors’ meeting on 21 Feb 2023.
@realfish Would you please resolve the conflicts? Thank you! |
@xfq Got conflicts resolved. Thank you for the reminder. There might be a line that needs to be reviewed, where I tried to reduce ambiguity with a minor revision. |
I discussed this with @r12a offline. Here's the current text:
And here's his suggestion:
|
My concern is whether “single-letter alphanumerics and/or acronyms” will be misunderstood as “single-letter alphanumerics” and/or “single-letter acronyms”. The copy here is supposed to mean “single-letter alphanumerics” and “acronyms/initialisms with any number of letters”. |
I think we decided that because there are no single letter acronyms, it resolves itself. |
There is a related use case for foreign (Western) names. A first name or middle name may be abbreviated into a single letter. See also https://w3c.github.io/clreq/#id86. The term “acronym(s)” here actually may be not precise and complete enough. I consider that “首字母缩写” in Chinese refers to acronyms, initialisms, and some forms of abbreviations. |
@realfish Would you please remove the |
@realfish Would you please resolve the conflicts? Thank you! |
* Fix capitalization for a “Text” word in English title. * Fix an inconsistency between TC & SC.
Co-authored-by: Fuqiao Xue <xfq@w3.org>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you!
Merging per today's meeting. Thank you, @realfish! |
A minor revision per editors’ meeting on 28 Mar 2023.
Updates per editors’ meeting on 21 Feb 2023:
Updates per editors’ meeting on 29 Nov 2022:
The lines with
checkme
marks are need to be confirmed.Preview | Diff