RE: [xliff] 2.4. (S6) Resource Inheritance

[Steven R Loomis <srloomis@us.ibm.com>]

Rodolfo,
  Yes, I have come to be in agreement, that resource inheritance shouldn't be part of core XLIFF.

Steven

"Rodolfo M. Raya" ---09/14/2012 02:48:15 PM---Hi Steven,

From: "Rodolfo M. Raya" <rmraya@maxprograms.com>
To: <xliff@lists.oasis-open.org>,
Date: 09/14/2012 02:48 PM
Subject: RE: [xliff] 2.4. (S6) Resource Inheritance
Sent by: <xliff@lists.oasis-open.org>

---

Hi Steven,
 
The problems with language inheritance belong to the application domain, not to XLIFF. The application processing the XLIFF file should know what to do with language codes and related data. 
 
An application may choose to treat “zh-Han” as completely different from  “zh” and not inherit anything. The XLIFF standard should not attempt to dictate what to do.
 
Regards,
Rodolfo
--
Rodolfo M. Raya       rmraya@maxprograms.com
Maxprograms       http://www.maxprograms.com
 
From: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:xliff@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Steven R Loomis
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2012 2:23 PM
To: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [xliff] 2.4. (S6) Resource Inheritance

Regarding: https://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/XLIFF2.0/Feature/ResourceInheritance 

Hello, all. An update on one of the items I'm assigned to.

A couple of people on our team discussed this one, and we're not sure how it is relevant to XLIFF, at least at a core level.
If there was a tool or process which needed to specify some sort of inheritance, we would give guidelines such as this:

*  just chop the BCP47 subparts from the end forward  ( so  en-US falls back to en,  etc)
* however, STOP at the Script subpart.   So  zh-Hant-TW  falls back to zh-Hant, but does NOT fall back to just zh.   In CLDR we call this "prohibiting cross script inheritance", otherwise  zh ( which may be, for example, Simplified Chinese) and zh-Hant (which is, Traditional Chinese) would be intermixed.
* Note: CLDR has more complicated inheritance specifications, for example, es-CO (Spanish in Colombia) falls back to es-419 (Latin American Spanish -  419 is the UN M.49 code for Latin America).  However, these relations are data dependent and would not be recommended for XLIFF.

But, those guidelines are not relevant if this feature is not a core part of XLIFF.  

Does anyone else know how this feature is relevant to XLIFF? Otherwise we will recommend that it be withdrawn.



One somewhat related question is, do we use xliff to interchange speech related translation?

Regards,
Steven