RE: [xliff] SC feedback: Validation

["Estreen, Fredrik" <Fredrik.Estreen@lionbridge.com>]

Hi Yves, All,

I'm strongly in favor of using a schema as the primary way to validate Xliff documents. I do not like the idea to rely heavily on external applications to do the validation.

For the purpose of testing applications for standards conformance including if they abide to the processing expectations set forth in the standard I do endorse a separate application. That is likely the only reasonable path to take.

The reason that I do not want it for the everyday validation by Xliff supporting applications is that it will most likely not be portable. I doubt that the TC has the resources to develop and maintain validation tools and libraries useable by any application on any platform that might want to validate Xliff. If no tool is provided for a platform it would lead to applications not validating or developing their own validation code. Even if there is a reference source code available the new implementations might (or in my experience will) behave differently leading to many definitions of valid in the field.

I would propose doing a schema in XML Schema 1.0 and another one augmented by the extensions provided by XML Schema 1.1. This should be a relatively "simple" task since 1.1 will interpret a 1.0 schema the same way it worked before. So it should be technically possible to just augment the 1.0 version with the new features. This would give us a basic validation that works for almost all cases today and a better validation that will become available to applications as the new schema becomes available on their platform or framework. To reduce the initial work we should probably wait with doing 1.1 until we have a reasonably stable 1.0 version.

Regards,
Fredrik Estreen

-----Original Message-----
From: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:xliff@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Yves Savourel
Sent: den 20 december 2011 12:52
To: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [xliff] SC feedback: Validation

Hi everyone,

During the last inline SC meeting we discussed the validation for XLIFF:

Which mechanism to use (schema or schema + dedicated tool), if XSD which version, what about RelaxNG? How much of this should be taken into account when designing our formats, etc.

There was a consensus that this needs to be bring up at the TC level and settled soon so we can know the guideline when working on the specification.

There has been some discussion of this before.
e.g. Rodolfo email here:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201111/msg00046.html

cheers,
-yves



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: xliff-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: xliff-help@lists.oasis-open.org