Re: [ISSUE-55] Re: [all] ITS to XLIFF Mapping

2012/10/23 Dave Lewis <>

> On 14/10/2012 10:15, Felix Sasaki wrote:
>> 3) No 2) would have been my input on Monday - from the ITS side, I think
>> it is helpful to have implementors on board. So far I can see Yves / Okapi,
>> and various people who might wrap Okaki (e.g. SOLAS). Having more
>> implementors who provide an additional basis library (=in addition to
>> OKAPI) might be helpful.
>>  Guys,
> Returning to this thread. CMS-LION already supports mapping of content
> files to-from XLIFF, so we'll be happy to try and support the ITS-XLIFF
> mappings as they firm up. We'd aim to make this available as a public
> demonstrator, linked in with SOLAS to show additional business
> functionality.
> David demonstrated aspects of this in Seattle (with simplisitc interim
> mappings), and can run through it again in Lyon.
> Also, Leroy is able to generate XLIFF as output of the test suite, so
> again we will be able to support ITS-to-XLIFF conformance tests based on
> our existing input files once the mapping is firmed up. We won't put this
> on the critical path in the test suite development, to avoid any delay to
> the ITS-conformance testing. Again, we'd be happy to offer this test
> facility in parallel to the ITS test suite - CNGL can always host it
> independently if any 'jurisdictional' issues arise.
> Yves, David, we may need to consider however, whether this set of ITS
> input files is sufficient to test all the mappings. Plus we'd also want to
> consider a set of XLIFF-to-ITS tests at some later point. We could use the
> saem test suite infrastructure, but it would have to wait until after the
> ITS draft and test suite are done.

This was my point too at



> cheers,
> Dave

Felix Sasaki
DFKI / W3C Fellow

Received on Tuesday, 23 October 2012 10:19:21 UTC