[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [xliff] Simplified XLIFF element tree
Hi David, In your version of the tree <group> and <extr-text> appear as required. I don't like that. Regards, Rodolfo -- Rodolfo M. Raya <rmraya@maxprograms.com> Maxprograms http://www.maxprograms.com > -----Original Message----- > From: David Filip [mailto:DavidF@MoraviaWorldWide.com] > Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 9:29 AM > To: Yves Savourel; xliff > Subject: RE: [xliff] Simplified XLIFF element tree > > Hi all, > > What I had in mind proposing the element for unsegmented was stg like this > > <xliff version1 >1 > ---[sample use case] > | > +--- <file original1 source-language1 datatype1 >+ ---feature > | > +--- <body>1 > | > +--- <group id1 resname? restype? >+ ---menu, how to etc. > | > +--- <extr-text id1 resname? restype? segmented?>+ ---in case it is > segmented > | translation module becomes > | ^ core obligatory to > hold the | > segments > ========================================================== > ================ > | translation module ˇ > | > +--- <trans-unit id1 resname? restype? >* > | | > | +--- <source >+ 11 > | | | > | | +--- [inline markup]* > | | > | +--- <target >? > | | | > | | +--- [inline markup]* > | | > | +--- <alt-trans >? > [<alt-trans> same as target is not obligatory, but needs some treatment in > conformance clause. The conformance clause should say that target is not for > TM matches or MT suggestions, that alt-trans must be used in case TM or MT > should be included] > > > > > > David Filip > Director, Research > ============================== > www.moraviaworldwide.com > Phone: + 420-545-552-203 > Fax: + 420-545-552-233 > Mobile: + 420-731-492244 > E-mail: davidf@moraviaworldwide.com > ============================== > > Děkujeme, že zvažujete dopad tisku emailů na životní prostředí./ Thank you > for considering the environmental impact of printing emails. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Yves Savourel [mailto:ysavourel@translate.com] > Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 2:23 PM > To: 'xliff' > Subject: RE: [xliff] Simplified XLIFF element tree > > Hi Rodolfo, all, > > > ... > > Your <trans-unit> elements don't have <source> elements. > > In an XLIFF file each segment should have a source and > > a target. > > In XLIFF 1.2 we have <source> and <target> elements. > In XLIFF 2.0 we don't know yet what we have. > > > > > Unsegmented text must be optional and independent from > > translatable segments. > > What is the rational for such a requirement? > > I can't think of a reason why XLIFF 2.0 cannot have a single representation of > the source with an optional way to indicate its segmentation. > > > > > In fact, I expect it not to be present in common > > XLIFF files (my tools will probably never include > > the unsegmented text). > > I have the opposite experience: By far, most XLIFF documents I see are not > pre-segmented. > > Cheers, > -ys > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that > generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: > https://www.oasis- > open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]