Re: [ISSUE-55] ITS in XLIFF - CAT tool requirements

thanks Yves, that's really helpful. We'll address this and other 
comments that have come up internally, and send out a revised version 
hopefully next week before progressing onto some wireframes for discussion.

cheers,
Dave

On 22/04/2013 13:41, Yves Savourel wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
> Here are a few comments for Anuar:
>
> === Translate:
>
> - another way to 'represent' original structural-type elements with translate='no' is to not extract them at all.
>
> - and inline content that is with translate='no' in the original file is also often represented as an inline code.
>
>
> === Terminology:
>
> - "...the relevant its:annotatorsRef link that can be followed to display more information about the engine that generated the annotation"
> Note that the IRI provided by its:annotatorsRef is not necessarily a link:
>  From the spec: "No single means is specified for how this IRI should be used to indicate processor information. Possible mechanisms are: to encode information directly in the IRI, e.g. as parameters; to reference an external resource that provides such information, e.g. an XML file or an RDF declaration; or to reference another part of the document that provides such information."
>
>
> === Element Within Text:
>
> - IMO there should be no such data category used in XLIFF. On of the goal of converting to XLIFF is to separate inline from no-inline codes and therefore all inline codes should already be represented by an inline XLIFF element. Original content that is nested should be represented in separate text unit.
>
>
> === Domain:
>
> - there is no such attribute as its:domain.
> The document is probably referring to itsx:domain.
>   
>
> === Text Analysis:
>
> - its:taSource value is not a URL.
>
>
> === MT confidence:
>
> - "...This will be represented in XLIFF using a match-quality attribute accompanied by a xlf:orgin attribute with value “MT”
> As far as I can tell the mapping in the wiki is not reflecting the latest discussions. e.g. using xlf:origin='mt' is not useful (see discussion here: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Mar/0135.html)
>
>
> === Localization quality Issue:
>
> - "Each record can include a type strong"
> What's a 'type strong'?
>
>
> === Localization Quality Rating:
>
> - "The whole target document, the target of a translation unit, a target segment or a target subsegment can be annotated with a localisation quality measure."
> while it's true that technically a sub-segment could be rated, I would use segment-level rating as the lowest level, anything under that may be very difficult to work with in practice.
>
>
> That's all for now.
> -yves
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Lewis [mailto:dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie]
> Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2013 7:00 PM
> To: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
> Subject: [ISSUE-55] ITS in XLIFF - CAT tool requirements
>
> Hi all,
> As you may know, we have an intern Anuar Serikov, who will be working on support for ITS annotation in the open source CAT tool OmegaT.
>
> As an first step we've produced a rough draft set of requirements for how users of a CAT tool could interact with ITS2.0 annotations at:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vt3a3wWFPFrEG8tS9X3RMClKVjV8xDXqWNHB4g8VGJw/edit?usp=sharing
>
> This may be of interest in those looking at the XLIFF-ITS mapping, since the requirements assume use of ITS within XLIFF. Any comments or feedback would be very welcome.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 23 April 2013 00:09:03 UTC