RE: [xliff] XLIFF 2.0 spec - dF Issue #01 - Extensibility and processing requirements

[Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>]

Hi,

> XLIFF-defined should be read as "defined by the XLIFF TC". 
> The ITS group can propose an enhancement but cannot define 
> an XLIFF module, it has to be defined (probably based on an ITS 
> proposal) and approved by the XLIFF TC. Any module will have 
> to use a namespace defined by the XLIFF TC following the 
> rules stated by OASIS.

Could you point us to those rules?
I'd like to read them and likely provide some feedback to OASIS.

Why would OASIS have any rule on what a module should be made of? We use for example xm:lang in the core and in one module. We could use the ITS namespace in another module, as long as the core schema defines what goes where I don't see a reason for not using the ITS namespace itself in a module. It would go against the very idea of interoperability.

Regards,
-yves