RE: [xliff] Best way to mark up an image in XLIFF 2.0?

["Rodolfo M. Raya" <rmraya@maxprograms.com>]

Hi Bryan,

 

Treating XML source as embeddable XML when creating an XLIFF file would be possible, but I think it may complicate XLIFF considerably.

 

For example, if we have this source fragment:

 

    <p>This image is nice: <img src=""/></p>

 

we could modify the XLIFF format to allow:

 

    <source>this image is nice: <ph id="1"><img src=""/></ph></source>

 

or perhaps:

 

    <source>this image is nice: <ph id="1"><html:img src=""/></ph></source>

 

Generalizing this case means allowing elements from foreign namespaces in all inline elements and maybe also in some structural elements.

 

But what happens with the <p> element? We have also lost it. Doesn't it deserve a space in the XLIFF world too?

And what would happen when the XML to embed is not HTML but a custom XML vocabulary? How would a tool handle the unknown pieces?

 

Escaping foreign XML fragments for storing in XLIFF files is a solution that works but has the disadvantage of complicating XML processing of those fragments. That's a very old known problem.

 

I have no solution proposal for the need to escape XML. Nevertheless, I wonder if implementing a solution would be worth the cost it might imply.

 

Regards,

Rodolfo

--
Rodolfo M. Raya <RMRAYA@MAXPROGRAMS.COM>
Maxprograms http://www.maxprograms.com

 

 

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [xliff] Best way to mark up an image in XLIFF 2.0?
From: "Schnabel, Bryan S" <bryan.s.schnabel@tektronix.com>
Date: Wed, October 03, 2012 10:53 am
To: "Rodolfo M. Raya" <rmraya@maxprograms.com>, "Dr. David Filip"
<David.Filip@ul.ie>
Cc: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>, "xliff@lists.oasis-open.org"
<xliff@lists.oasis-open.org>

> The problem you face is that current inline elements
> are not XSL friendly and interfere with the goal you have.

I think the fact that the solution is not XSL friendly is just a side effect of the fact that the solution requires an XML hack. Sorry if this is worded too strongly. But if we use an XML vocabulary for our Localization Interchange File Format; and if our use case has XML source as its source; and if we say the way we recommend you store your source XML is to escape it; then it seems to me that we are prescribing an XML "no no" as a best practice.

I don't blame people for rolling their eyes and saying "here he goes again." I guess if I'm the only one who finds this distasteful, I must be in the minority. And maybe I should just stop complaining. I guess the real test is to see if members of our community care one way or the other. I kind of feel like I'm representing people who see a need (for example) to include XLIFF in things like the DITA OT. XML friendliness is needed in cases like that.

That said, I could certainly hold my nose and make the <data id="222">&lt;img src=""></data> approach work in XSL. And I could adapt my DITA-XLIFF Roundtrip for the DITA OT (for example) work okay. So luckily for me, it is just a philosophical gripe.

Thanks for putting up with my semi-annual XML friendliness rants.
________________________________
From: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org [xliff@lists.oasis-open.org] on behalf of Rodolfo M. Raya [rmraya@maxprograms.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 3:53 AM
To: Dr. David Filip
Cc: Yves Savourel; xliff@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [xliff] Best way to mark up an image in XLIFF 2.0?

">" doesn't need to be escaped in XML.

Regards,
Rodolfo

Sent from my iPad

On Oct 3, 2012, at 7:48 AM, "Dr. David Filip" <David.Filip@ul.ie><mailto:David.Filip@ul.ie>> wrote:

">" should be "&gt;" in your data example
:-)

Dr. David Filip
=======================
LRC | CNGL | LT-Web | CSIS
University of Limerick, Ireland
telephone: +353-6120-2781
cellphone: +353-86-0222-158
facsimile: +353-6120-2734
mailto: david.filip@ul.ie<mailto:david.filip@ul.ie>



On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 4:27 AM, Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com><mailto:ysavourel@enlaso.com>> wrote:
&lt;