- From: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>
- Date: Sun, 19 May 2013 05:23:50 -0600
- To: "'Felix Sasaki'" <fsasaki@w3.org>
- CC: <public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org>
Sure. itsxlf is a bit long but would be fine. or itsm? ixlf? -ys -----Original Message----- From: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org] Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2013 4:34 AM To: Yves Savourel Cc: public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org Subject: Re: XLIFF maping layout Hi Yves, all, thanks for starting this. One question on I think all the three (XLIFF general, 1.2, 2.0) mapping pages: they say "itsx: is a schema prefix for the namespace http://www.w3.org/ns/its-xliff/" wouldn't it be less confusing to use a different prefix for its-xliff? The itsx prefix is mostly used for extensions to ITS 1.0 and ITS 2.0 in general, with the namespace uri http://www.w3.org/2008/12/its-extensions Btw., I have updated the extension namespace "its-extensions" doc to now cover also ITS 2.0. Best, Felix Am 19.05.13 02:18, schrieb Yves Savourel: >> Also, I suggest we progress the XLIFF1.2 and 2.0 mapping on different >> pages... > Mapping for XLIFF 1.2 is here: > http://www.w3.org/International/its/wiki/XLIFF_1.2_Mapping > > Mapping for XLIFF 2.0 is here: > http://www.w3.org/International/its/wiki/XLIFF_2.0_Mapping > > We can replace the text in the old table by pointers (like it's done for Translate) as we make progress. > Then we can just point to the two pages when all is done. > > -ys > >
Received on Sunday, 19 May 2013 11:24:28 UTC