W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org > February 2013

Re: [ISSUE-55] Re: updates provenance mapping and best practive in ITS-XLIFF mapping

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 23:10:50 +0100
Message-ID: <5123F86A.3090007@w3.org>
To: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
Am 19.02.13 04:45, schrieb Yves Savourel:
> Hi Dave,
>> So:
>> a) we might have to support LRQ for mrk in (1) but could
>> rule it out of scope for (2)
>> b) allowed characters for target would be in (2) and could
>> use global rules, but perhaps isn't the case for (1) (unless we
>> include the case where we are importing from another bi-text format.)
> I still think using global rules in any use case is bad: adding information to an XLIFF document means it may be read by another XLIFF tool, so the case (2) can lead to a case (1).
> Let's put it this way: what can we do with global rules we can't with local markup?
> This also goes back to the discussion about using only global rules to define general mapping and avoiding in for specific instance of data. For example you do <its:provenanceRule selector="//source" etc.../> on a file with only trans-unit/source elements and all is well. Then another tool (not ITS aware) adds alt-trans entries, and suddenly you have also all trans-unit/alt-trans/source elements affected by the provenance.
> I would try to stay away from global rules for XLIFF. (actually try to stay away from global rules that are instance-specific in general).


- Felix

> cheers,
> -yves
Received on Tuesday, 19 February 2013 22:11:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:08:29 UTC