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

Re: [all] ITS to XLIFF Mapping

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2012 14:01:26 +0200
Message-ID: <CAL58czr4aY1toywPCT4XODEmcKFJ_9UYUFxGXbaA5Hmj7GcLyQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>
Cc: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
issue-55 (for tracker)

2012/10/14 Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>

> Hi Felix, all
>
> > That would be useful - we can then use the issue name
> > in the mail subject, and people who are not working on this
> > can skip it.
>
> I will raise one then.
>
>
> > Wrt "how to proceed": although this is not a normative features of ITS
> 2.0,
> > having test files (generic XML / HTML5 / DocBook etc. in > XLIFF+ITS out)
> > seems to be quite useful. Maybe also for the roundtripping, though it
> > seems there is a n:1 mapping from the source format to XLIFF,
> > e.g. all of these <span its:translate=no">...
> > <code its:translate=no">...
> > would end up in <mrk mtype="protected">
> > So should this be part of the or a different "real life usage"
> > test suite?
>
> The only mapping --but maybe that is not the proper term-- we can do is
> making sure a same content is assigned the same ITS information in both the
> original data and XLIFF.
> In XLIFF you wouldn't necessarily know to on which element the
> "do-not-translate" information was set, just that the same content is
> labeled "do-no-translate" (that is because the original codes are
> 'abstracted in XLIFF).
>
>
> > On the "how to proceed" part: do we need to involve the XLIFF TC
> > formally here? By no means I am pushing for that (less formal = faster
> progress),
> > just asking. In terms of the actual work being done we already have
> > many people in both TCs, so that shouldn't be a problem.
>
> I think we should make sure this effort is visible to the TC. So anyone
> can participate if they want.
> But I don't think the TC needs to be formally involved until we have
> something that can be a module or some "representation guide".
>
>
> > Nevertheless a timeline might be good (with milestones like mapping
> > definition, mapping test case dev, mapping testing, etc.).
>
> +1
>
>

OK ... Would you drive the mapping?


> I also think this needs to be done soon, as it may possibly provide
> feedback to the ITS WG to fine tune ITS itself.
>
>
Agree. Here is a rough idea of the timeline, comments and more details
welcome:
- Initial mapping: end of October 2012 (already done, but not finalized)
- Test development and actual conversion: end of December 2012
- Feedback to MLW-LT working group during ITS 2.0 last call, that is by end
of January 2012
- Mapping finalization by March 2013

How does that sound? Should we put the timeline at
http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/XLIFF_Mapping
?

Felix

Cheers,
> -yves
>
>
>
>


-- 
Felix Sasaki
DFKI / W3C Fellow
Received on Sunday, 14 October 2012 12:01:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:31:55 UTC