Re: XLIFF Mapping - status

On 30/08/2013 12:54, Yves Savourel wrote:
>> - general: in some place one may want to remind readers of
>> >the HTML <> XML conversion its-annotators-ref <> its:annotatorsRef
> Not sure about that one.
> We don't use its-annotators-ref in XLIFF, so is there a reason why we would refer to it (other than in an example where the original
> document is in HTML)?
> And then why make a special mention of its-annotators-ref vs its:annotatorsRef but not the other mappings between the HTML and the
> XML notations (like its-ta-class-ref vs its:taClassRef in the same example).
> I'm probably missing something.
>   
>
+1 - we already mention its:annotatorsRef where its used with the 
relevant data categories, i.e. term, textAnalysis and mtconfidence - so 
i'm not sure it need special mention beyond that.
cheers,
Dave

Received on Monday, 2 September 2013 08:42:02 UTC