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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

xliff message

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

Subject: RE: [xliff] Simplified XLIFF element tree

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yves Savourel [mailto:ysavourel@translate.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 9:23 AM
> 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?

Because it should be possible to generate XLIFF files that don't include unsegmented text, which is not required at translation time.

> 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.
Translatable segments should contain a clearly defined source associated with a target, which could be empty, populated with a copy of source or missing when translation starts. 

If there isn’t a clear association between <trans-unit>, <source> and <target> like the one we had in XLIFF 1.0 and 1.1 things can go bad like in the sad experiment with <seg-source> introduced in XLIFF 1.2.

Please don't ruin the element that contains the segment source by adding segmentation information to it. 

Please keep unsegmented text out of the way.

Rodolfo M. Raya   <rmraya@maxprograms.com>
Maxprograms      http://www.maxprograms.com


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