Re: [xliff-comment] XLIFF 2.0 Core finished?

[Javier Sola <lists@khmeros.info>]

On 5/23/12 3:53 AM, Yves Savourel wrote:

> We simply need to come up with a good set of attributes/values and processing expectations in 2.0 to reflect the different states of the segments' translation.
I agree with this. A few of these states will be used almost by every 
tool, while others will use a more extensive set, but this will highly 
increase interoperability among applications and reduce the discussion 
on what tools include or not in the <target>. Each of the core states 
should be highly defined if possible.

I also think that the interpretation of "no target tags" or 
<target></target> can be defined also to ensure ineroperability.

Cheers,

Javier