RE: [xliff] Locked vs translate

I think it would be more like this:

yes – the content can be translated (default)

locked – the content is translatable but currently it MUST remain un-changed

no – the content MUST NOT be translated

Initially, like DavidW, I was thinking translate and locked are two distinct features that should be stored in different attributes. The issue of having translate=’no’ with locked=’no’ can be resolved with processing expectation where we would state that when translate is set to ‘no’ the content must not be translated regardless the value of locked.

But the more I look at Fredrik’s idea, the more it seems useable.

Maybe thinking about the values like this may help:

translate=”no | yes-locked | yes-not-locked”

(but I do prefer the “no | locked | yes” notation)

cheers,

-yves

From: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:xliff@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Rodolfo M. Raya
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 7:40 AM
To: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [xliff] Locked vs translate

Hi Yves,

Are you suggesting to change the values for the translate attribute in this way:

yes	The segment can be translated (default).
locked	The segment MAY be translated but SHOULD NOT.
no	The segment MUST NOT be translated.

Regards,

Rodolfo

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

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [xliff] Locked vs translate
From: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>
Date: Wed, October 03, 2012 10:21 am
To: <xliff@lists.oasis-open.org>

Hi all,

Since this topic is being discussed for 2.0.

Here is an example where a tool uses an extension to provide a 'locked' information.
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/okapitools/message/3285

This specific case could probably be handled with 1.2 approved='yes', but it illustrates that some users do feel that using translate='no' is not the proper solution in all cases.

The solution that Fredrik proposed yesterday (translate="yes|no|locked") may be workable.
For "no": not translatable. For "yes|locked": translatable, but possibly currently protected. The interest is that it is reversible without affecting the translate='no' entries.
And you would never have cases like translate='yes'+locked='no'.

Just some thoughts...
cheers,
-yves

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

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

xliff message