OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

xliff-comment message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Standards-based representation of term translations based on XLIFF 2.1 glossary module in XLIFF 1.2


The example in http://docs.oasis-open.org/xliff/xliff-core/v2.1/os/xliff-core-v2.1-os.html#glossary-module indicates that translations of terms - e.g. encoded in a terminology database - can be inside an XLIFF 2.1 "trans-unit".

I wonder if the XLIFF 1.2 "trans-unit" extension point could be used in a similar vein.

With XLIFF 1.2 on could get something like

                   <trans-unit id="1">
                                This indicator is only necessary for
                                <mrk id="m1" mtype="term" type="term">manual depreciation</mrk>
                                      source="http://www.example.com/def/termbase/t975";>manual depreciation</gls:term>
                                      source="http://www.example.com/def/termbase/t769";>manuelle Abschreibung</gls:translation>

Looking at the XLIFF 1.2 "trans-unit" specification "As content, Zero, one or more non-XLIFF elements [are allowed]" (see http://docs.oasis-open.org/xliff/v1.2/os/xliff-core.html#trans-unit), I wonder whether the use of the XLIFF 2.1 "glossary" element in XLIFF 1.2 would be OK, since one could take the position that it is an XLIFF element.

Would be great to get perspectives on this.


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]