- From: Nathan Glenn <garfieldnate@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 11:11:25 -0700
- To: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>
- Cc: "public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org" <public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CACs83pjpft7BeoE9Sv1JgzdQvMwSVWZLJcTLTHBWo7xY_qW-hg@mail.gmail.com>
I'm glad the example helped here! Now I know I didn't understand that you didn't understand:) In my implementation I'll just localize everything as shown in the mapping. The other category that has the same source/target confusion problem is idValue, which is currently mapped to resname on trans-unit. locQualityRating and mtConfidence make sense in trans-unit, since they refer to the quality of the source-target relationship. Nathan On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 4:37 AM, Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com> wrote: > Hi Nathan, all, ** **** > > ** ** > > Thanks for the example. Now I’m know sure I didn’t understand :)**** > > > > I was talking about “skeleton”-like methods to ways to carry the ITS > global rules from the source XML to the translated one, not to carry the > information they are pointing too.**** > > ** ** > > You example helps a lot.**** > > > > The problem with doing something like that is that it forces the XLIFF > processor to be an ITS processor too.**** > > ** ** > > Obviously an ITS processor can read and understand ITS info in an XLIFF > document, but to really process XLIFF it would have to also have > XLIFF-specific process added: dealing with states for example, etc. The aim > of the mapping is to allow developers to add support for ITS data > categories in their XLIFF tool by just adding support for a few attributes. > **** > > ** ** > > In your case you are demonstrating tells me that maybe the mapping for > External Resource is not OK and perhaps that is what we need to fix.**** > > ** ** > > There is a mechanism in XLIFF to carry non-textual data needing > localization: <bin-unit>. So we could change itsxlf:externalResourceRef to > point to the <bin-unit> rather than directly to the external resources. > Like this:**** > > ** ** > > <xliff**** > > xmlns="urn:oasis:names:tc:xliff:document:1.2"**** > > xmlns:itsxlf="http://www.w3.org/ns/its-xliff/"**** > > its:version="2.0">**** > > <file original="blah.xml" source-language="en" datatype="plaintext">**** > > <body>**** > > <bin-unit id='x1' mime-type='video/mp4'>**** > > <bin-source><external-file href='en_vid.mp4'/></bin-source>**** > > <bin-target><external-file href='jp_vid.mp4'/></bin-target>**** > > </bin-unit>**** > > <trans-unit itsxlf:externalResourceRef='#x1'>**** > > <source xml:id="1">Some text</source>**** > > <target xml:id="2">テキスト</target>**** > > </trans-unit>**** > > </body>**** > > </file>**** > > </xliff>**** > > ** ** > > And to address Felix’s remark about having several external references in > the same element (like the <video> element in the specification’s example): > we could still make the value of itsxlf:externalResourceRef a > space-separated list or IRIs (and maybe call the attribute > externalResourceRefs).**** > > ** ** > > Thoughts?**** > > -yves**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > From: Nathan Glenn [mailto:garfieldnate@gmail.com] **** > > Sent: Monday, September 30, 2013 4:11 PM**** > > To: Yves Savourel**** > > Cc: public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org**** > > Subject: Re: ITS rules in XLIFF**** > > ** ** > > You've understood me perfectly, actually. If you don't think it's a bad > idea, then I'm happy :) I was just worried because the mapping explicitly > makes everything local.**** > > Here's an example anyway that highlights one reason to do this. Anytime > the mapping puts something in the <trans-unit> element, it means that you > can't locally differentiate between application to source and target. Let's > say the original document had a <targetPointerRule> and so source and > target were extracted into one <trans-unit>. Localizing an > <externalResourceRefRule> would mean putting itsxlf:externalResourceRef in > the <trans-unit> element, but this is incorrect if the source and target > have different external resources (let's say one video was dubbed in the > target language). Instead of localizing it, I would just save the > referenced text in the header in <its:span> elements.**** > > ** ** > > Original:**** > > <xml xmlns:its="http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its">**** > > <its:rules version="2.0">**** > > <its:externalResourceRefRule selector="x|y" **** > > externalResourceRefPointer="@foo">**** > > <its:targetPointerRule **** > > selector="/xml/x" **** > > targetPointer="/xml/y"/>**** > > </its:rules>**** > > <x foo="en_vid.mp4">text</x>**** > > <y foo="jp_vid.mp4">テキスト</y>**** > > </xml>**** > > ** ** > > Extracted:**** > > <xliff**** > > xmlns="urn:oasis:names:tc:xliff:document:1.2"**** > > xmlns:its="http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its"**** > > its:version="2.0">**** > > <file original="blah.xml" source-language="en" datatype="plaintext">**** > > <header>**** > > <its:rules>**** > > <its:targetPointerRule selector="//source"**** > > targetPointer="../target"/>**** > > <its:externalResourceRefRule selector="id('1')" **** > > externalResourceRefPointer="id('span1')">**** > > <its:externalResourceRefRule selector="id('2')" **** > > externalResourceRefPointer="id('span2')">**** > > </its:rules>**** > > <its:span xml:id="span1">en_vid.mp4</its:span>**** > > <its:span xml:id="span2">jp_vid.mp4</its:span>**** > > </header>**** > > <body>**** > > <trans-unit>**** > > <source xml:id="1">Some text</source>**** > > <target xml:id="2">テキスト</target>**** > > </trans-unit>**** > > </body>**** > > </file>**** > > </xliff>**** > > ** ** > > Nathan**** > > ** ** > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com> > wrote:**** > > Hi Nathan,**** > > **** > > I’m afraid I’m still not sure what is the scenario. Sorry to be slow.**** > > **** > > If you are talking about how to re-create the part of your source file > that has the global rules into the translated XML (so essentially to ‘move’ > those rules from the source XML to the translated XML, through XLIFF), then > yes, you can use whatever mechanism you want, and storing thing in the > skeleton is usually your best chances to get things preserved.**** > > **** > > But I’m not sure this is the scenario you are talking about.**** > > Maybe a short example with the source XML and the created XLIFF would help > me (and everyone) to get the idea.**** > > **** > > **** > > -yves**** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > From: Nathan Glenn [mailto:garfieldnate@gmail.com] **** > > Sent: Monday, September 30, 2013 2:48 PM**** > > ** ** > > To: Yves Savourel**** > > Cc: public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org**** > > Subject: Re: ITS rules in XLIFF**** > > **** > > Actually, please tell me if you think that is a bad idea. The XLIFF > mapping seems to be designed to make everything absolutely localizable, and > this sort of strategy seems to be avoided there. It just happens to look > like the shortest path from A to B (preserving global rules with the least > work) for me.**** > > Nathan**** > > **** > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Nathan Glenn <garfieldnate@gmail.com> > wrote:**** > > Thanks! I see now how extensible XLIFF is. I can put extra elements in the > elements listed in 2.5.1 of the spec. The issue for me was that I already > have code that can preserve ITS rules and their matches during a document > transformation, but it requires re-pasting all of those pointer values and > I didn't know where to put them in XLIFF. I guess I can just put each of > them in their own <its:span> element in the XLIFF <head>.**** > > Nathan**** > > **** > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 8:10 AM, Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com> > wrote:**** > > Hi Nathan,**** > > **** > > Not sure if I understand the issue.**** > > **** > > In general the global rules that carry data in your XML file will be seen > as ITS ‘properties’ attached to the pointed node, when processing the XML > input for extraction. So, that’s correct that you cannot tell where they > are coming from, and therefore you cannot really update them when merging > back.**** > > **** > > As you pointed out, the current mapping uses elements like <note> or > attributes like comment to store the data. That is because it tries to > re-use what the XLIFF 1.2 format provides.**** > > In a few cases like Terminology you could use xlfits:termInfoRef to point > to an elements in the XLIFF that is from your own namespace and hold > additional info about how to feedback the potentially modified info.**** > > **** > > I’m not sure if that helps,**** > > -yves**** > > **** > > **** > > From: Nathan Glenn [mailto:garfieldnate@gmail.com] **** > > Sent: Sunday, September 29, 2013 2:07 PM**** > > To: Yves Savourel**** > > Cc: public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org**** > > Subject: Re: ITS rules in XLIFF**** > > **** > > Thanks. I wonder if it's worth even trying to preserve global rules in my > application. If I were to create an XLIFF file for a given XML file, and > also try to preserve the global rules by making them point to new nodes in > the XLIFF file, is there any generic place where I could put the contents > contained by nodes selected through *Pointer attributes in the rules, or > would I have to use the specific locations that differ for each type of ITS > (e.g. its:termInfo, itsxlf:domains or a <note> element)?**** > > **** > > Nathan**** > > **** > > On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 4:35 AM, Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com> > wrote:**** > > Hi Nathan, **** > > **** > > Yes, the mapping doesn’t use global rules. The idea is that an XLIFF > processor should be able to add support for ITS by just implementing > support for the attributes defined by the mapping.**** > > **** > > This doesn’t prevent an ITS processor to support XLIFF by having global > rules describing the XLIFF features, just like for any other XML format.** > ** > > **** > > -ys**** > > **** > > **** > > From: Nathan Glenn [mailto:garfieldnate@gmail.com] **** > > Sent: Sunday, September 29, 2013 12:18 AM**** > > To: public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org**** > > Subject: ITS rules in XLIFF**** > > **** > > Hi all (especially Yves),**** > > I'd like to confirm an observation on ITS in XLIFF. At least judging by > the mapping documentation, it seems that ITS in XLIFF does not allow for > global rules of any kind, and that during mapping all rule matches must be > turned into local attributes of some kind. Is this correct?**** > > Nathan**** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > ** ** >
Received on Tuesday, 1 October 2013 18:11:53 UTC