OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

xliff message

[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=65677#comment-65677 ] 

Felix Sasaki commented on XLIFF-28:
-----------------------------------

I agree with Yves' last comment, also on the part "if the TC decides ... duplication of the description".

I have not seen new arguments in this thread for a while. What would be a good way to close this issue - vote on it formally during a call? There may be three options:

1) current state: have a definition of annotatorsRef in the XLIFF 2.1 spec, with new text and new terminology (e.g. introducing the term "triple")
2) have a definition of annotatorsRef in the XLIFF 2.1 spec, copying the definition of the ITS 2.0 spec
3) have no definition of annotatorsRef in the XLIFF 2.1 spec, but just reference the ITS 2.0 spec.

> 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
>             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]