RE: [xliff] Comments on Fragment Identification

[Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>]

Hi David, all,

Your updated proposal has still the same fundamental issue in my opinion:
It achieves shorter fragment identification by sacrificing ID scopes.

The more data types an ID scope includes the more difficult is will be for applications to implement it. For example: There is
absolutely no reason for a CAT tool to have to look-up all the IDs used in inline codes and annotations to pick the IDs of the
original data elements, or to look-up units Ids to pick an ID for a group. They live in different domains.

Yet, with your proposal, we force the applications to un-natural Id scopes just because we are using an IRI fragment notation that
requires all elements under <unit> to share the same ID scope.

This type of XLIFF-induced restrictions should be done only if there are no alternative. And in this case there is.

Cheers,
-yves