RE: [] Re: [Issue-55] XLIFF mapping

> I would propose to close issue-51 (too many global rules) - not 
> only given the XLIFF timeline, but also other discussions (e.g. 
> about mtconfidence) I don't think that we will reach consensus 
> within the next weeks what global rules to drop and what not.
> I would, however, propose an action item for each data category 
> owner to come up with "as realistic as possible" examples to 
> demonstrate the usefulness of global rules.

Sound reasonable.


Received on Thursday, 8 November 2012 22:37:40 UTC