Re: [xliff] Low importance: Do we have to have the schemas embedded in the specification?

["Dr. David Filip" <David.Filip@ul.ie>]

I think this is a question for the broader community

Implementers on the TC but also people like Spartans, Phil Ritchie, SDL, Multicorpora etc.

As editor I would be happy to get rid of this potential source of inconsistency.

However as you say the current listing are generated.

And I have to manage stage specific links anyways, so this does not save much in editing effort and IF people are using them for reading convenience, as intended, we should probably keep them...

No strong opinion here, happy to remove the listings if we hear from users that they are not using them..

Cheers

dF   

Dr. David Filip

=======================

OASIS XLIFF TC Secretary, Editor, and Liaison Officer 

LRC | CNGL | CSIS

University of Limerick, Ireland

telephone: +353-6120-2781

cellphone: +353-86-0222-158

facsimile: +353-6120-2734

http://www.cngl.ie/profile/?i=452

mailto: david.filip@ul.ie

On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com> wrote:

Hi all,

Do we have to have the schemas embedded in the specification document?

- They make the document a lot longer.

- It's a potential source of error since they also exist outside the specification (I know they are built automatically, but still
one could make change by accident).

- During editing you have to re-generate the specification each time you make a small change to a schema.

I think a link would be just fine.

Cheers,
-yves



---------------------------------------------------------------------
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