[all] Question on mapping best practices

• From: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>
• Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 11:25:29 -0600
• To: <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
• Message-ID: <assp.06462f578b.assp.0646bc2126.008301cdb39e$e9b350a0$bd19f1e0$@com>

Hi all,

While mapping ITS to XLIFf we ran into cases of mapping that may occur elsewhere and for which an ITS guideline may be helpful.

Here is the case:

The localization note has two pieces of information:  a) the text of the note and b) a type (description|alert)

When mapping an inline note to XLIFF we can use this:

<mrk mtype='x-itsNote' comment='[text of the note]' its:locNoteType='alert'>...</mrk>

Or this:

<mrk mtype='x-itsNote' comment='[text of the note]' ZZZ:locNoteType='alert'>...</mrk>

The comment attribute is where XLIFF is expected to put the note, and because there is no equivalent to the note type we use a non-XLIFF attribute there. The question is can/should we use the ITS attribute or another one?

In both cases if we want to process the file with an ITS processor, we have to use global rules:

<its:locNoteRule selector="//mrk[@its:locNoteType='alert']"
 locNotePointer="@comment" locNoteType='alert'/>

<its:locNoteRule selector="//mrk[@its:locNoteType='description']"
 locNotePointer="@comment" locNoteType='description'/>

or

<its:locNoteRule selector="//mrk[@ZZZ:locNoteType='alert']"
 locNotePointer="@comment" locNoteType='alert'/>

<its:locNoteRule selector="//mrk[@ZZZ:locNoteType='description']"
 locNotePointer="@comment" locNoteType='description'/>

I think both would work.
But we're not sure if the best thing to do for the local attribute is to use a native ITS attribute or define a new namespace and use something from there.

Any thoughts?

Thanks,
-yves

Received on Friday, 26 October 2012 17:26:10 UTC