RE: [xliff] XLIFF 2.0 Core

["Schnabel, Bryan S" <bryan.s.schnabel@tektronix.com>]

Rodolfo and Yves, 

Please add me to the *agree* list.

I'm never quite sure how to indicate the next person in agreement after somebody has indicated their agreement with "+1." Should I also say "+1" or do I increment (i.e., +2)?

- Bryan

-----Original Message-----
From: Yves Savourel [mailto:ysavourel@translate.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2011 6:19 AM
To: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [xliff] XLIFF 2.0 Core

Hi Rodolfo,

Using a "unit > segment > language" structure looks ok to me. It is one of the two representations I was thinking about.

It does have the advantage to make the segment id un-necessary. Simpler is better.
We may have to think a bit about tools that allow cross-aligned segments, but that can possibly be resolved with an optional id.

The scenario you are describing is a good use case and I agree with the example of process: Segmentation change is one of the modifications the merging tool should be able to handle.

I also concur that clear definitions of the different parts are important.


> The example described above could be improved by adding optional 
> elements between segments that would hold stuff we don't want 
> translators to see, like the spaces at the start of a sentence 
> or perhaps some formatting that applies to the whole sentence.

+1

So, yes Rodolfo, we basically agree.

-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