RE: [xliff] Extensibility methods

[Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>]

Hi all,

I tend to agree with Fredrik's general assessment of metaHolder and custom namespace: one is simpler and can be handled more generically, the other is more powerful but less easy to work with generically.

Now a question (seemingly un-related, but bare with me for a while):

What are the processing expectations for an optional XLIFF module (e.g. like <matches>) for a tool that does not support that module?

Concretely, for example, if Tool A does not support <matches>, is the tool expected to try to preserve it? Is it expected to somehow set some flag on it if the segmentation changes and affect <matches>?

In other words: what type of generic processing do we expect a tool to do on the elements of the XLIFF modules it does not support?


Cheers,
-yves