[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [xliff] XLIFF 2.0 spec - dF Issue #01 - Extensibility and processing requirements
OASIS has rules for namespaces: http://docs.oasis-open.org/specGuidelines/namingGuidelines/resourceNaming.html . The namespaces we publish must be conformant. We cannot publish a namespace from W3C as our own. Regards, Rodolfo -- Rodolfo M. Raya rmraya@maxprograms.com Maxprograms http://www.maxprograms.com > -----Original Message----- > From: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:xliff@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf > Of Yves Savourel > Sent: Monday, November 05, 2012 6:31 PM > To: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: RE: [xliff] XLIFF 2.0 spec - dF Issue #01 - Extensibility and processing > requirements > > Hi, > > > XLIFF-defined should be read as "defined by the XLIFF TC". > > The ITS group can propose an enhancement but cannot define an XLIFF > > module, it has to be defined (probably based on an ITS > > proposal) and approved by the XLIFF TC. Any module will have to use a > > namespace defined by the XLIFF TC following the rules stated by OASIS. > > Could you point us to those rules? > I'd like to read them and likely provide some feedback to OASIS. > > Why would OASIS have any rule on what a module should be made of? We > use for example xm:lang in the core and in one module. We could use the ITS > namespace in another module, as long as the core schema defines what goes > where I don't see a reason for not using the ITS namespace itself in a > module. It would go against the very idea of interoperability. > > Regards, > -yves > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: xliff-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org > For additional commands, e-mail: xliff-help@lists.oasis-open.org
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]