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: Asgeir Frimannsson [mailto:asgeirf@redhat.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 9:47 AM
> To: xliff
> Subject: Re: [xliff] Simplified XLIFF element tree
> > I agree with your goals. There should be one representation for
> > segmented content, which could very well be a traditional <trans-unit>
> > with a <source>/<target> pair.
> >
> > The 2nd goal can be achieved by keeping the optional unsegmented text
> > separate from the segmented version. In other words, separate from the
> > traditional <trans-unit> that could be used for the first goal.
> One concern I have is that we replicate what we have with <seg-source> -
> where we have two different representations of the source content, one
> with segment markers, and one without. I'm not sure what the intentions of
> this was, but I'm guessing it has to do with the ideal of keeping the content of
> <source> immutable - which is a good goal.

Please separate two things: unsegmented text and translatable segments.

There should be only one representation of source text in translatable segments and it should not include segmentation markers.

If segmentation markers are added or not to unsegmented text during segmentation process is a very different thing. I would not alter the unsegmented text.

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]