RE: [xliff] Implementing extensions

[Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>]

Hi Rodolfo, all,

 

A very good list!

I agree with all, with some reservations for #6 and #7.

 

For #6: I just wonder if it shouldn’t be “extensions SHOULD be public and documented” (more explanations on that on the two other emails I just posted)

 

For #7: I have no idea if anything IPR-related rules need to be specified. It’s good to bring up that topic though.

 

Cheers,

-ys

 

 

From: Rodolfo M. Raya [mailto:rmraya@maxprograms.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 11:12 AM
To: Yves Savourel; xliff@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [xliff] Implementing extensions

 

Hi,

 

Some points to keep in mind regarding extensibility:

1. It must be safe to ignore custom extensions while processing an XLIFF file;
2. Extension points should not be allowed in critical elements, like <source> or <target>;
3. Extensions must not be used instead of XLIFF standard features;
4. A tool that generates XLIFF files with custom extensions must be able to accept an XLIFF file processed with other tool as long as the received file is valid XLIFF;
5. A tool that uses custom extensions should not expect that other tools update custom data while processing an XLIFF file;
6. XML schemes that define custom extensions must be public and documented;
7. Any custom extension used in an XLIFF file must be published under the same IP terms the XLIFF standard is published and be freely redistributable;
8. Custom extensions are subject to standard rules for XML handling and the recommendations regarding XML usage included in the XLIFF specification.

 

Best regards,

Rodolfo

--
Rodolfo M. Raya
Maxprograms http://www.maxprograms.com

 

 

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [xliff] Implementing extensions
From: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>
Date: Wed, March 21, 2012 8:52 am
To: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org