W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org > July 2012

RE: Re: Re: [ACTION-160] (related to [ACTION-135] too) Summarize specialRequirements

From: Jan Nelson <Jan.Nelson@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 05:07:12 +0000
To: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>, 'Felix Sasaki' <fsasaki@w3.org>, 'Michael Kruppa' <Michael.Kruppa@cocomore.com>
CC: "public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org" <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>, "fredrik.estreen@lionbridge.com" <fredrik.estreen@lionbridge.com>, Kevin O'Donnell <kevinod@microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <8E3F7404816BBC46A339E2D718928ECB34779B@TK5EX14MBXW601.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
Kevin and I can talk about that and get back to you.



Thanks,



Jan

________________________________
From: Yves Savourel [ysavourel@enlaso.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 9:49 PM
To: 'Felix Sasaki'; 'Michael Kruppa'
Cc: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org; fredrik.estreen@lionbridge.com; Kevin O'Donnell
Subject: RE: Re: Re: [ACTION-160] (related to [ACTION-135] too) Summarize specialRequirements


Hi Felix, Micha, all,



--- forbiddenChars:



Yes, a simple list of the forbidden characters would work for us too.

That was Giuseppeís initial proposal more or less.



Itís too bad no-one has time to come up with a sub-set of regex expressions, but I know it would be time consuming and fraught with pitfalls.



One thought: In the XLIFF TC, during the discussion about extensions and the <metaHolder> element, I now recall some examples by Kevin OíDonnell (from Microsoft) that included user-defined regex properties, presumably to allow verification. See https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201205/msg00053.html (in the example at the end).



It would be good to know if he (or someone else at Microsoft) could comment on the use of a common simple regex sub-set for forbiddenChars as we discussed.



(@Kevin: see thread starting here: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Jul/0066.html)



But Iím guessing Kevinís property may go beyond checking for forbidden chars.



As for XLIFF compatibility: there is no way to break interoperability with 1.2 since the value for charclass is not really defined. For 2.0: I donít think there are anyone working on such feature. So ITS may be the go-to solution.



--- maxStorageSize:



For maxStorageSize: I believe Fredrik said he would try to post his proposal this week, or next. He also mentioned he had some ideas that could allow to map ITSís potential approach.



Cheers,

-ys
Received on Wednesday, 11 July 2012 05:07:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:31:47 UTC