[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: [OASIS Issue Tracker] (XLIFF-28) Comments in the draft
[ https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/XLIFF-28?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=65359#comment-65359 ] David Filip commented on XLIFF-28: ---------------------------------- Removed VERSAL editorial comments in Localization Quality Issue. All were addressed in csprd01 or csprd02, except one: ADD AN EXAMPLE OF TOOLS ANNOTATION THAT PROCESSES STANDOFF MARKUP, SO THAT THE INHERITANCE OF TOOLS ANNOTATION (= RELATED TO THE ACTUAL CONTENT; NOT THE STANDOFF INFORMATION) BECOMES CLEAR. SHOW WHAT HAPPENS IF THERE ARE TWO VALUES TO STANDOFF WITH ANNOTATORSREF IN PARALLEL, E.G. THE FOLLOWING IN THE SAME <target> ELEMENT: </para> <para><mrk id="m1" type="its:generic" its:annotatorsRef="localization-quality-issue|toolXYZ1"</para> <para> its:locQualityIssuesRef="#itsm=lqi1">c'es le conteneur</mrk> </para> <para><mrk id="m1" type="its:generic" its:annotatorsRef="localization-quality-issue|toolXYZ2"</para> <para> its:locQualityIssuesRef="#itsm=lqi1">c'es le conteneur</mrk> Assigning to Felix to add such an example.. > Comments in the draft > --------------------- > > Key: XLIFF-28 > URL: https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/XLIFF-28 > Project: OASIS XML Localisation Interchange File Format (XLIFF) TC > Issue Type: Bug > Components: ITS Module > Affects Versions: 2.1_csprd02 > Environment: http://markmail.org/thread/jzdqfm5c6hgofjbu > Reporter: Yves Savourel > Assignee: David Filip > Priority: Minor > Labels: Proposed, editorial, request_tc_discussion, work_required > Fix For: 2.1_csprd03 > > > There are quite a few (more than a dozen) embedded comments in this latest > draft: > e.g: "COMMENT: MAKE CLEAR THAT THERE ARE TWO HANDLINGS, ONE IS NOT TO REPRESENT > THE DATA CATEGORY, THE OTHER IS IN THE MODULE. THE > EXTRACTION IS FOR ITS PROCESSORS GENERATING XLIFF, THE DIRECT REPRESENTATION IS > FOR XLIFF PROCESSORS." > Some, like the one above, seem to indicate that there are still relatively > important parts of the text that needs to be > edited/added/etc. > I assume this means there will be a csprd03 regardless of the disposition of the > comments for csprd02. Is that correct? -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.2.2#6258)
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]