[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Proposal to limit <alt-trans> to one <target> element
Hi all, Following my action item from the meeting last
Tuesday here is my proposal: 1) Problem Description: The current XLIFF specification allows multiple
<target> elements inside a single <alt-trans>. This has the
following disadvantages: a) Attributes that convey information about a specific
<alt-trans> may need to be introduced on the <target> element
rather than on the <alt-trans>. This causes the <target> element to
have attributes that are used only when it appears inside an <alt-trans>
- not when it appears in a <trans-unit>. That makes the <target>
element unnecessarily complicated and overloaded with functionality. I can think of two concrete examples where this
applies: i) The current restype attribute. In a
<trans-unit> the <target> will always be the same restype as the
<trans-unit>, but in an <alt-trans> with multiple <target> a different
restype could be required for each of the <target> elements. ii) The recently proposed “applied”
attribute (see emails from Magnus and Matt), which is used to indicate which
suggested translation was applied during translation, and any reasons it was
changed. If multiple <target> elements are allowed in an
<alt-trans> this attribute must be applied to the <target> element,
rather than the <alt-trans>. But of course this attribute should not be
used for <target> elements that appear in <trans-unit> elements. b) Processing of the <alt-trans> content gets
more complicated. Tools processing the <alt-trans> would need
additional processing to expect multiple <target> elements – it would
not be possible to use the same algorithm as for <trans-unit>. c) The same information can easily be represented by
using separate <alt-trans> elements, one for each <target>, as in
this example: <alt-trans> <target>(first
suggested translation)</target> </alt-trans> <alt-trans> <target>(second
suggested translation)</target> <alt-trans> The only issue I can see with this is that this
construct will occupy a little bit more space in the XLIFF file. But taking
into consideration the unwanted side effects mentioned above I think that is a
very small price to pay, in particular as it is likely to be a rather rare
case. 2) Proposal: a) Deprecate the
use of multiple <target> elements in a single <alt-trans>. This naturally leads to the following consequential
proposals: b) Deprecate the “restype”
attribute for the <target> element. It should no longer be needed, as the <target>
will always be of the same restype as the <trans-unit> or
<alt-trans> it appears in. c) Assuming the
suggested “applied” attribute is accepted, introduce it for the
<alt-trans> element rather than for the <target> element. Best regards, Magnus |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]