RE: issue-51 too many global rules

> So that means we need only the standoff markup pointer rules,
> and no other pointer attributes from the XLIFF point of view?

Yes, I believe so. 

There are cases like xlf:maxbytes that could be mapped to such information, but in this case it also needs other attributes (encoding, etc.) and because the overriding is complete, I don't think you can have a mixed of some info using pointers and other using ITS direct markup for a given data category. In any case Storage Size is not in your list of data categories to be amputated of their global rules.

> Here it would be interesting to have some data: have you written 
> and used in ITS 1.0 "real life" global rules that add information
> *without fixed values* to attributes or elements?

Yes, definitely. Very frequently with Localization Note.

I'm less concerned with 'complex/rare' data categories like Disambiguation, or MT Confidence, because it's unlikely an existing format has the equivalent.

> The discussion about dropping global rules started with an example
> of localization note

Yeah, about that: You'll note that my initial remark had nothing to do with pointers. It was a concern about having examples using global rules to annotate selected nodes in the document. Those actually don't use pointers at all.


Received on Tuesday, 23 October 2012 13:37:35 UTC