[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [xliff] Glossaries in XLIFF 2.0
Hi everyone, Just to make sure the item #21 “Term proposals” in the wiki is clear: The tentative item is about a way to markup the source content for terms and store their corresponding translations. A bit like the <match> does for segment matches. Marking up the terms would be likely something done with the inline annotation element (currently <mrk>) and I had not really thought about how to store the translation yet. Potentially the mechanism could allow in-place storage or point to somewhere in the XLIFF document, or even possibly point outside. In other words: item #21 is certainly related to having a glossary stored inside XLIFF, but it could potentially work without it as well. Since the item has not been really worked on yet, there is little about what it would look like. Sorry if it misled anyone. All this doesn’t change the merit or demerit to have a glossary in XLIFF and the actual format of that glossary. I think it is a related, but separate topic. Cheers, -yves From: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:xliff@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Rodolfo M. Raya Hi All, Current version of XLIFF (1.2) and older ones all have a placeholder for storing a glossary in the header. So far, the existing <glossary> element has not been useful because there is no indication on how to store glossary terms in it. There isn’t a well-defined way to store terms ensuring interoperability. We have a request in the wiki for storing term proposals in an XLIFF file. The request is located here: http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/XLIFF2.0/FeatureTracking#XLIFF2.0.2BAC8-Feature.2BAC8-TermProposals.TermProposals . Current owner of the request is Yves. We also have a concrete XML schema for holding glossary data in SVN. The schema defines 6 elements and 3 attributes that were originally included in the initial draft for XLIFF 2.0. Description of those elements and attributes is available in the PDF that documents the initial draft, which is also included in SVN. Having the XML schema and initial documentation makes it easy to implement support for simple glossaries in XLIFF 2.0 as an optional module. Should we move the existing request from section 2 in the wiki to section 1, making it an optional module or should we discard the request completely moving it to section 3? Regards, Rodolfo -- |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]