[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: [OASIS Issue Tracker] (XLIFF-9) Use (also) the normal ITS namespace in the ITSM module
[ https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/XLIFF-9?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=64067#comment-64067 ] Felix Sasaki commented on XLIFF-9: ---------------------------------- On 1): sure, but that issue does not change with ITSM, see the list of differences between using ITSM vs. ITS namespace On 2): URNs are a type of URI scheme, see https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#page-7 . So if an implementation can parse URIs it can also parse URN. In different words, using an HTTP URI will not break anything. > Use (also) the normal ITS namespace in the ITSM module > ------------------------------------------------------ > > Key: XLIFF-9 > URL: https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/XLIFF-9 > Project: OASIS XML Localisation Interchange File Format (XLIFF) TC > Issue Type: New Feature > Components: ITS Module > Affects Versions: 2.1_csprd01 > Environment: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff-comment/201610/msg00020.html > Reporter: Yves Savourel > Assignee: Felix Sasaki > Labels: request_tc_discussion > Fix For: 2.1_csprd02 > > > Looking at the rules files for ITSM, we can see there are several data categories that cannot be mapped by rules because they do not > have pointer attributes available. > - Localization Quality Issues > - Localization Quality Rating > - Provenance > - MT Confidence > This means a pure ITS processor cannot process an XLIFF document and get any data for those data categories. > This would be resolved if the namespace was ITS' rather than the ITSM (ITS Module) namespace. > I believe we selected early on to go with ITSM even for the data categories defined from scratch because of the <sm/> case where the > semantics need to be adjusted. Since, we establish (I think) that the <sm/> case is such that ITS processors cannot really resolve > it anyway. > In other words, the <sm/> case is hopeless if you are not an XLIFF processor, whether you use ITS or ITSM, and XLIFF processors do > treat <sm/> in a special way in the case of ITSM. They could do the same for ITS. > Hence, it seems all the data categories that ITSM implements 'from scratch' could be in the normal ITS namespace, and work for both > XLIFF and ITS processors. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.2.2#6258)
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]