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

Re: [all] ITS to XLIFF Mapping

From: Dave Lewis <dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 19:42:42 +0100
Message-ID: <507C5922.3000000@cs.tcd.ie>
To: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
Yves,
I see in the table in: 
http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/XLIFF_Mapping
that you have mapping for the structural and the inline specified for 
some data categories. Is the intetion that thse can coexist in an 
individual data category with ITS-like overide and default rules, or 
would their use be mutually exclusive?
  i.e. the its mark-up applies only to all the content in the trans 
unit, OR it is specified separately for each mrk?

The latter seems needed to support direct mapping to exisitng XLIFF 
mark-up, but it means we don't treat XLIFF files as a XML file in all 
cases, which seems a bit 'messy'.

see you in bit,
Dave

On 14/10/2012 12:26, Yves Savourel wrote:
>> 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).
>
>
Received on Monday, 15 October 2012 18:43:09 UTC

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