RE: XLIFF Mapping - status

Hi Martin,

 

>> itsx is for  <http://www.w3.org/2008/12/its-extensions> http://www.w3.org/2008/12/its-extensions which holds

>> the markup for extensions to ITS: This was used in ITS 1.0 to 

>> define potential markup for 2.0. We can still continue to do 

>> that for 2.0.

> 

> In general, using less namespaces is desirable. Base vocabulary 

> and extensions may coexist in the same namespace, and this 

> simplifies things for users.

 

I agree that, in general, the fewer namespaces the better.

 

But I'm not sure how one can extend existing features as well as create new functionality (like a data category such as "Readiness <http://www.w3.org/International/its/wiki/IssuesAndProposedFeatures#Proposal:_.22Readiness.22_data_category> ") could work from within the same namespace without changing the schema.

 

Cheers,

-yves