W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-its@w3.org > April to June 2007

RE: ITS-related comments for TMX 2 proposal

From: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@translate.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 08:35:47 -0600
To: <public-i18n-its@w3.org>
Message-ID: <001f01c7a390$fa9fe730$9b05a8c0@BREIZH>

Hi Everyone,

Christian had some additional comments regarding TMX 2.0 (http://www.lisa.org/standards/tmx/tmx2/)

They are listed below. I would proposed to add the ones marked with ++++ to our current list
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its/2007AprJun/0029.html) and send them ASAP (no later than tomorrow EOB US time).
There are also some with ---- or ???? When I think it's not needed or I'm not sure.

Christian: Note that whatever is sent through ITS you should feel free to send you own comments as well :)



==============================

1. ITS-specific Feedback

++++ a. I wonder whether BCP47 should be referenced rather than RFC4646

YS> Good point.



---- b. "note" and "comment" are related to the ITS data category "localizationNote". I wonder if TMX might want to consider this
(eg. by recommending ITS markup rather than TMX native markup).

YS> Mmm... I wonder. I can see how its:locNote could replace the comment attribute, but for <note>: we do not have an equivalent
element outside <its:rules>. I'm also not sure if both <note> and comment have anything to do with localization. It could be any
comments. Lastly, TMX is not really a format someone would translate: it's the result of a translation. Not sure. Note also that we
advise to provide a set of rules where these comments/notes are mapped to ITS Localization Note if needed. I'm not sure. Any comment
anyone???



----???? c. "sub-flow" is related to the ITS data category "elements within text". I wonder if TMX might want to consider this (eg.
by recommending ITS markup rather than TMX native markup).

YS> How that would work? "Element Within Text" has no local element, just a rule.



++++---- d. TMX does not seem to prescribe markup for directionality and ruby. I wonder if TMX might want to consider the
corresponding ITS markup (eg. by explicitly allowing markup from the ITS namespace at the appropriate locations).

YS> Agree with its:dir (it's already in the current comments).
For <its:ruby>: TMX does not allow extension inside <seg> so one cannot put <its:ruby> there.



2. Related to standards in the vicinity of ITS

I wonder whether the following XML-related are appropriate

++++ a. third party standards for date/time and language codes
     I have never heard someone talking about for example BCP 37 as "third party standard"

YS> Good point.



++++ b. XML-compliant/compliance
     I see a section on "conformance" in the XML spec, but not on compliance


++++ c. Since XML syntax is case sensitive, any XML application must define casing conventions.
     I don't think the second part of the statement is correct


++++ d. it may be necessary to extend TMX vocabulary using XML Namespaces.
     Shouldn't this rather be "Additional extensibility can be implemented by means of the mechanisms defined in XML Namespaces?



3. General

++++ a. The namespace for TMX 2.0 is defined as "http://www.lisa.org/tmx20".
     Shouldn't this rather be "The namespace URI ..."?


++++ b. TMX files are always in Unicode. They can use either of three encoding methods: UTF-16 (16-bit files), UTF-8 (8-bit files)
or ISO-646 [a.k.a. US-ASCII] (7-bit files).
     What about e.g. "'EUC-JP'"? Would this be alright as well?

YS> Agree. That restriction is an old remain of the very first version. It should be completely removed. The encoding system should
be the same as XML and probably should not even been mentioned anymore.



???? c. it may be necessary to extend TMX vocabulary using XML Namespaces.

YS> What is the comment?



???? d. All foreign elements and attributes added to a TMX file must be defined using an XML Schema. All XML Schemas declared in a
TMX document must be made available to permit validation of the foreign constructs included in the file.

YS> Comment?



???? d. The "href" attribute contains a valid URL that describes the location of a file.
     Why not use the definition eg. from HTML?

YS> Remain of the old text probably.



???? e. TMX version / default value 2.0
     Wouldn't one want to see a list of all allowed values in order to be able to validate although for example 1.4b?

YS> Not sure what is the usual practice?



???? f. A cross-platform utility that validates TMX documents against TMX Schema and also verifies if they follow the requiremenst
described in this document is included as part of TMX 2.0 specifications.

Source code of the validation tool is available for download in OSCAR's web site.

     What's needed other than a validating parser?

YS> Some things cannot be checked by DTD. I guess RelaxNG, NVDL or Schematron would be able to validate everything.



++++ g. backwards compatibility
     Does not seem to be given.



++++ h. errata and feedback
     It would be nice if provisions for an errata page would be given and if the feedback would be directed to a list like
tmx_imp@lists.lisa-open.org


====================================================

Cheers,
-yves
Received on Thursday, 31 May 2007 14:35:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:12:49 GMT