RE: [xliff] [Fwd: [xliff-comment] Schema issues with extensibleattributes]

["Rodolfo M. Raya" <rmraya@heartsome.net>]

On Wed, 2006-10-18 at 10:53 +0100, Tony Jewtushenko wrote:
Hi,

Looks like the current Committee Draft ballot needs to be killed …

Seems so :(

The TC spent several meetings in the 1.1 timeframe discussing whether to use the ##any or ##other namespaces in the extension definitions, and the decision was to use ##any specifically to enable adding XLIFF namespace attributes at the extension points.  Does anyone have any thoughts on the approach we should take to deal with the validation problems?

There was only one schema for XLIFF 1.1 . Now we have strict and transitional. Transitional version should use ##any for backwards compatibility, but IMO the strict schema should disallow deprecated attributes and use ##other.

As for the sample files, I will correct the schemaLocation bugs and reissue hopefully the final version of the spec w/ supplementary files late today assuming we have addressed the ##any/##other issue.  I assume the strict sample file should have all deprecated structures removed – could someone please confirm this approach?

Looks reasonable to me.

Best regards,
Rodolfo

--
The information in this e-mail is intended strictly for the addressee, without prejudices, as a confidential document. Should it reach you, not being the addressee, it is not to be made accessible to any other unauthorised person or copied, distributed or disclosed to any other third party as this would constitute an unlawful act under certain circumstances, unless prior approval is given for its transmission. The content of this e-mail is solely that of the sender and not necessarily that of Heartsome.