Re: XLIFF Mapping - status

Thanks.
The document mentions both itsxlf:externalResourceRef and
itsx:externalResourceRef. Do the itsx ones need to be fixed?


On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 4:51 AM, Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com> wrote:

>  > First, the value of "x-its-translate-yes" is mentioned ** ****
>
> > for the attribute 'mtype' in a <mrk> element. ****
>
> > This value is, however, not mentioned anywhere in the ****
>
> > actual XLIFF 1.2 spec. Is this something planned for 1.3?****
>
> > Is it something that will be added via the itsxlf namespace?****
>
> > This is more curiosity than practicality.****
>
> ** **
>
> As David noted, this uses the 1.2 naming convention for user-defined
> values.****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> > Second, localization notes are supported via the <note> element,****
>
> > but the document only mentions the use of general <note>'s. ****
>
> > The default value for a <note> element's 'annotates' attribute ****
>
> > is "general". The other possible values are "target" and "source", ****
>
> > indicating that the note applies either to the <source> or the ****
>
> > <target> element contents. Is this to be supported, as well? ****
>
> > By which, of course, I mean, is it recommended that implementers ****
>
> > support this or is it to be ignored?****
>
> ** **
>
> Good point. There is no reason to avoid using 'annotates'. We should add
> examples.****
>
> ** **
>
> Cheers,****
>
> -yves****
>
> ** **
>