Subject: Re: [xliff-comment] XLIFF 2.1 spec: bad links
Hi Mihai,thank you very much for your comment on the XLIFF Version 2.1 COS01A JIRA Issue was created to track your comment's resolutionPlease follow the comments resolution on the above link.Unfortunately, only XLIFF TC members can edit our JIRA issues, however feel free to react to the proposed or approved resolutions in this email thread.This way all your follow up remains grouped under this permanent markmail link that the TC uses as the Issue source reference:Please note that the Public review period ends on 19th Dec and therefore the TC won't be able to meet before year end to formally dispose of all received COS01 issues.Nevertheless, we expect to address all COS01 issues during January 2017.Cheers and thanksdFOn Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 9:52 PM, Mihai Nita <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:Probably not a big deal, just confusing...(#em, #type and so)
There are two different pages that I can find for the XLIFF 2.1 spec:
A newer document here: http://docs.oasis-open.org/xli
It is marked "12 October 2017" and the sub-title is "Candidate OASIS Standard 01"
And an older one t http://docs.oasis-open.org/xli
Marked "23 August 2017" and the subtitle is "Committee Specification 01"
Looking at the newest one (xliff-core-v2.1.html) some of the links are wrong
(they point to older doc, instead of staying in the same doc)
For instance go to <source> (http://docs.oasis-open.org/xl
and click on any of the possible content tags.
<sm> goes to http://docs.oasis-open.org/xli
ff/xliff-core/v2.1/cos01/xliffand so on. -core-v2.1-cos01.html#sm
v2.1/xliff-core-v2.1.html#sm, click on any attribute (e.g. type), it goes to
I might be some bad redirect though, because saving the file the href(s) point to local labels