RE: [xliff] Input to discussion on Conformance

[Yves Savourel <ysavourel@translate.com>]

Hi, 

I would agree with Rodolfo.
As long as they are well-formed, and only in the places where XLIFF allow them, custom extensions shouldn’t matter for conformance.
It seems also logical that we have a binary result: either a conformant document or a non-conformant one.

For processing conformance: I think it’s important to have processing expectations and express them in clear clauses in the specification. But it seems that this goes beyond what OASIS sees as “conformance”, and we could treat this separately?

I think we are going to have difficulties to validate processing conformance. We could offer a set of input files in different formats and a corresponding set of XLIFF documents that illustrate the processing expectations, but beyond that I don’t think we could have a tool that automatically verifies if the XLIFF document follow them or not.

Cheers,
-ys