- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 12:36:40 +0200
- To: "Dr. David Filip" <David.Filip@ul.ie>
- CC: "Lieske, Christian" <christian.lieske@sap.com>, Dave Lewis <dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie>, "public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org" <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <51766438.1060905@w3.org>
Hi David, I agree with your statement wrt to the role of XLIFF. My point is only: we can give guidance to the "native support" scenario as well, without disturbing the importance of XLIFF. We already have described ITS 2.0 support in XLIFF extraction scenarios http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-mlw-metadata-us-impl-20130307/#Translation_Package_Creation and ITS 2.0 support in non XLIFF scenarios http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-mlw-metadata-us-impl-20130307/#ITS_2.0_for_localization_of_content_in_a_Web_Content_Management_System My (personal) point here would be: we can re-use a lot of descriptions for both scenarios. Take e.g. the sentence "A source subsegment marked with the equivalent of its:translate="no" (using xlf:mrk mtype="protected") should be visually highlighted for the tool user." We can easily generalize this by saying "A source subsegment marked with the equivalent of its:translate="no" (in XLIFF, using xlf:mrk mtype="protected") should be visually highlighted for the tool user." It then would also cover e.g. the jquery plugin, as demonstrated at http://attrib.org/jquery-its-example/ (above demonstration does the "visually highlighted for the tool user." thing) Best, Felix Am 23.04.13 12:22, schrieb Dr. David Filip: > Christian, all, > IMHO direct ITS support in CAT tools only makes sense if they are > working with source formats. Which is often the case, but is exactly > the undesirable formats and filters jungle that XLIFF had been set up > to simplify and override. > If a tool is an XLIFF extractor/merger it of course makes sense for > them to be able to recognize ITS directly at least in HTML5 and a > number of standard XML vocabularies. > > Supporting ITS on extract/merge is very different (and complementary) > from supporting a translator consumption/manipulation of the > categories during XLIFF editing. > > AFAIK OmegaT in neither incarnation is an XLIFF extractor/merger, it > relies on OKAPI to get its XLIFFs. > So as I see it, work on direct support of ITS in OmegaT does not make > much sense and is orthogonal to the mapping support. > > Cheers > dF > > > Dr. David Filip > ======================= > LRC | CNGL | LT-Web | CSIS > University of Limerick, Ireland > telephone: +353-6120-2781 > *cellphone: +353-86-0222-158* > facsimile: +353-6120-2734 > mailto: david.filip@ul.ie <mailto:david.filip@ul.ie> > > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 8:58 AM, Lieske, Christian > <christian.lieske@sap.com <mailto:christian.lieske@sap.com>> wrote: > > Hi Dave, > > I wonder if Anuar's work could, or even should look at the CAT-ITS > relationship not just from an XLIFF point-of-view. > > To me, a scenario in which CAT tools in some contexts work > natively with ITS - and not "mediated" via XLIFF - seems > appealing. Possibly, you already know that some CAT tools already > provide this kind of native ITS 1.0 support. > > To a certain degree, the native ITS support would be in line with > "To foster interoperability, implementers are strongly encouraged > not to rely on these mappings and to implement the ITS 2.0 quality > types natively." (from: > http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#lqissue-typevalues). > > The existing list of "Use Cases" is quite interesting. I would be > tempted to differentiate between two categories: "visualization", > and "interaction". > > Cheers, > Christian > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dave Lewis [mailto:dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie > <mailto:dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie>] > Sent: Montag, 22. April 2013 03:00 > To: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org > <mailto: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 10:37:15 UTC