- From: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>
- Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 15:39:32 -0600
- To: "'Renat Bikmatov \(Logrus.Net\)'" <renat.bikmatov@logrus.net>
- CC: <public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org>, "XLIFF Main List" <xliff@lists.oasis-open.org>
Hi Renat, Thanks a lot for those good notes. We'll make sure to incorporate the fixes as we move the description to the XLIFF module specification. Cheers, -ys -----Original Message----- From: Renat Bikmatov (Logrus.Net) [mailto:renat.bikmatov@logrus.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 8, 2014 11:59 AM To: Felix Sasaki; Yves Savourel Cc: public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org Subject: RE: ITS Mapping Update - some inconsistencies found Hi Felix, Yves, and All, Please find attached the copy of mapping specification with our comments [SN] added on possible inconsistencies. Regards, Renat Bikmatov | IT and Localization Solutions Architect | Senior Localization Project Manager | +7 (495) 646-3564, ext. 110 www.logrus.net -----Original Message----- From: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org] Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 9:35 AM To: Renat Bikmatov (Logrus.Net) Cc: Yves Savourel; xliff@lists.oasis-open.org; public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org Subject: Re: ITS Mapping Update - What is the plan? Hi Renat, Am 21.08.2014 um 20:39 schrieb Renat Bikmatov (Logrus.Net) <renat.bikmatov@logrus.net>: > Hi Yves, > > We are considering to further develop our ITS 2.0 implementation project aimed at visualization of content and ITS metadata - this time for XLIFF 2.0 content. I asked the developer to look at the ITS 2.0 mapping schema for XLIFF 2.0 (http://www.w3.org/International/its/wiki/XLIFF_2.0_Mapping), and he has found several inconsistences and/or omissions. So my question is: > > Do you think it is worth for us to participate in further development and debugging of the current ITS-to-XLIFF 2.0 mapping specification (if this is still in progress) - OR- Does it make sense to wait until ITS 2.0 is implemented as XLIFF 2.x Module (hopefully, in near future)? Yves may have a different answer, here is mine: the mapping is being developed in the wiki and nothing else has happened in XLIFF TC about it. So it would make a lot of sense to know about the inconsistencies and omissions here before the mapping is finalized. Best, Felix > > Regards, > Renat Bikmatov | IT and Localization Solutions Architect | Senior > Localization Project Manager | +7 (495) 646-3564, ext. 110 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Yves Savourel [mailto:ysavourel@enlaso.com] > Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2014 5:48 PM > To: public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org > Cc: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: ITS Mapping Update > > Hi all, > > (CCing the XLIFF TC for information, as the idea is to make this into > a module) > > An update on the ITS mapping for XLIFF 2: > > As discussed in Dublin last month and in this morning ITS-IG call, we are looking at classifying the ITS data categories into several classes: > > - the one for which there is a direct XLIFF mapping (so nothing to > implement), > - the ones partially covered in XLIFF, > - the ones without equivalent in XLIFF > - the ones that are not metadata (and therefore not really to be > 'mapped') > - and several ones not mapped yet > > The latest draft is here: > https://www.w3.org/International/its/wiki/XLIFF_2.0_Mapping > > Feedback and suggestions welcome, especially on the data categories not mapped yet, like Directionality, Storage Size, etc. > > > Cheers, > -yves > > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 8 October 2014 21:41:31 UTC