RE: [xliff] RE: [xliff-comment] csprd02 comment: XLIFF as a processing format for CAT tools

[Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>]

Hi Bryan,

Nice try. But that would be missing the other part of the statement which says we shouldn't encourage it either.

In my humble opinion, this is one of those notes that brings little to the specification (the use case underlined by the note is
already expressed by including Modifier and Enricher agents in the main text).

Cheers,
-yves


-----Original Message-----
From: Schnabel, Bryan S [mailto:bryan.s.schnabel@tektronix.com] 
Sent: Friday, October 4, 2013 3:41 PM
To: Yves Savourel; xliff@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [xliff] RE: [xliff-comment] csprd02 comment: XLIFF as a processing format for CAT tools

Yves,

Your words are much better and clearer than mine. Let's use yours as the proposal. 

"If some tools choose to use it {XLIFF} as their processing format that is fine and well. We shouldn't discourage it." 

I fear the wording I cited discourages.

Thanks for improving my bad wording,

Bryan
________________________________________
From: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org [xliff@lists.oasis-open.org] on behalf of Yves Savourel [ysavourel@enlaso.com]
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2013 2:07 PM
To: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [xliff] RE: [xliff-comment] csprd02 comment: XLIFF as a processing format for CAT tools

Hi Bryan,

> Can this language be recast in order to encourage CAT tools to still 
> use XLIFF as a native format?

I had no idea we were encouraging CAT tools to use XLIFF as a native format.

XLIFF is only an exchange format.
If some tools choose to use it as their processing format that is fine and well.
We shouldn't discourage it. But I don't think we should encourage it either: it's not the purpose of XLIFF.

Cheers,
-yves



-----Original Message-----
From: Schnabel, Bryan S [mailto:bryan.s.schnabel@tektronix.com]
Sent: Friday, October 4, 2013 1:33 PM
To: xliff-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [xliff-comment] csprd02 comment: XLIFF as a processing format for CAT tools

I am worried that the statement that XLIFF is only intended for data exchange could endanger tools that use XLIFF as native format.

Writer, Writer Agent:

"Note
Since XLIFF is intended as an exchange format rather than a processinmg format, many applications will need to generate XLIFF
Documents from their internal processing formats, even in cases when they are processing XLIFF Documents created by another
Extractor."

Can this language be recast in order to encourage CAT tools to still use XLIFF as a native format?

Thanks,

Bryan


--
This publicly archived list offers a means to provide input to the OASIS XML Localisation Interchange File Format (XLIFF) TC.

In order to verify user consent to the Feedback License terms and to minimize spam in the list archive, subscription is required
before posting.

Subscribe: xliff-comment-subscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
Unsubscribe: xliff-comment-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
List help: xliff-comment-help@lists.oasis-open.org
List archive: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff-comment/
Feedback License: http://www.oasis-open.org/who/ipr/feedback_license.pdf
List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
Committee: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=xliff
Join OASIS: http://www.oasis-open.org/join/


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS
at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php