[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [xliff] Comments on Fragment Identification
Hi David, all, Your updated proposal has still the same fundamental issue in my opinion: It achieves shorter fragment identification by sacrificing ID scopes. The more data types an ID scope includes the more difficult is will be for applications to implement it. For example: There is absolutely no reason for a CAT tool to have to look-up all the IDs used in inline codes and annotations to pick the IDs of the original data elements, or to look-up units Ids to pick an ID for a group. They live in different domains. Yet, with your proposal, we force the applications to un-natural Id scopes just because we are using an IRI fragment notation that requires all elements under <unit> to share the same ID scope. This type of XLIFF-induced restrictions should be done only if there are no alternative. And in this case there is. Cheers, -yves
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]