RE: [xliff-inline] 1.14. Should be able to represent the mutual relationships between a nested flow of text and its parent

[Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>]

> a. Relate via nesting
> b. Relate via reference
> b.1 Unidirectional (e.g. only from "container" to subflows)
> b.2. Bidirectional (from "container" to "subflow" and 
> vice versa; corresponds to your sketch)

Good summary. And maybe the TC will come up with other variants.

One issue I see with the option a. is that the inline markup would have no way to know how many sub-flows are extracted without having to lookup the container structure.


> Unfortunately, I am not sure if b.1 would really capture 
> that spirit of "represent mutual relationships".

No, it would not.


> Wrt. the referential representation I could also imagine 
> the following variant:
> <source>This is an image: <ph id='1'><ph id='2' 
> ctype="x-flow"/><ph id='3' ctype="x-flow"/></p>.</source>

I assume you meant "<ph id='1'/>" not "<ph id='1'>".

I see one issue with this representation: If one of sub-flows is deleted in the next version of the source document, the XLIFF markup of the parent flow has to have a different number of codes. That would decrease re-usability without a good reason.


> ... From my understanding, however, XLIFF so far was oriented 
> towards the "Relate via nesting" option. Upon second thought - 
> since I often prefer the "there is a general rule, and there 
> is only one way for doing it" approach - I seem to lean towards a.

Possible good points. I think the idea is that at the inline markup level we could avoid to assume a specific representation of the sub-flows besides saying each one would be in its own "unit" (or whatever concept correspond to that in our definitions). This would allow for easier integration in various containers.

-ys