W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org > April 2013

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

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 12:36:40 +0200
Message-ID: <51766438.1060905@w3.org>
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>
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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:32:07 UTC