Re: [all] Question on mapping best practices

On 26/10/2012 19:12, Felix Sasaki wrote:
> Wrt to your comments and ITS mechanisms: why use them at all? Why not 
> specifying the mapping in general, e.g. in a separate profile of ITS 
> "how to use ITS in XLIFF"? We then won't need to use any ITS 
> mechanisms at all - an ITS implementation can use the mapping or not.
> Above answer may be not enough, let's take it from where.
Hi Felix, Yves, David, all,
I think having a separate profile has some distinct advantages. As we've 
discussed in:

it seem for some data categories (QualityIssue, Quality Precis, 
transAgentProvenance, disambiguation, text analysis 
annotation/confidence and mtconfidence), the main and possibly only use 
case for (ref)pointer attribute is the XLIFF mapping case. See yves 
example in:

So if the  _only_ use case for pointers in these data categories is 
supporting the XLIFF mapping in this declarative manner, then supporting 
the same in a separate ITS profile could help simplify these data 
categories considerably. What do you think?


Received on Sunday, 28 October 2012 23:40:03 UTC