Last update: Jan-30-02
1. TMX
1.1. Purpose
1.2. Stage
1.3. Maintaining Organization
1.4. Relevance to the W3C
2. TBX
2.1. Purpose
2.2. Stage
2.3. Maintaining Organization
2.4. Relevance to the W3C
3. OLIF
3.1. Purpose
3.2. Stage
3.3. Maintaining Organization
3.4. Relevance to the W3C
4. XLIFF
4.1. Purpose
4.2. Stage
4.3. Maintaining Organization
4.4. Relevance to the W3C
5. Summary
5.1. Language/Locale Identification
5.2. Localization Properties of XML
Formats
5.3. Localization Namespace
TMX is the Translation Memory eXchange format.
Web site: http://www.lisa.org/tmx.
Allows the transfer of translation memories between from a translation tool to another. A translation memory (TM) is a collection of source entries with their translations in one or more target languages.
Example: TMXExample.xml
(normally the file uses a .tmx
extension).
Version 1.3 was released on August 29th 2001.
The format is implemented, at various degrees, by most translation and
localization tools.
The OSCAR Special Interest Group at LISA (the Localisation Industry Standards Association).
Only relatively relevant. One of the main common areas of interest is the
definition of a set of proper identifier for languages. Currently TMX uses xml:lang
but the consensus is that the values do not cover all necessary
languages/locales (for example, Latin-American Spanish). OSCAR has a
sub-committee on this topic.
TBX is the TermBase eXchange format. It is also known as
DXLT (Default XLT format (XLT: XML representations of Lexicons and
Terminologies)).
Web site: http://www.ttt.org/oscar/xlt/DXLT.html.
Allows the transfer of glossaries between from translation tool to another. The format is based on ISO 12200: MARTIF (Machine-Readable Terminology Interchange Format).
Example: TBXExample.xml
(normally the file uses a .tbx
extension).
Still at a draft stage, but well advanced.
SALT (Standards-based Access service to multilingual Lexicons and Terminologies) at BYU.
Only relatively relevant. Currently TBX uses a lang
attribute,
it plans to uses xml:lang
but the consensus is that the values do
not cover all necessary languages/locales (for example, Latin-American Spanish).
OLIF is the Open Lexicon Interchange Format.
Web site: http://www.olif.net.
Allows the transfer of terminlogogical and lexical data between from translation tool to another. This is close to the same purpose as TBX, but OLIF is more geared toward NLP data (for example: Machine Translation lexicons). Designed for 6 languages for now.
Example: OLIFExample.xml.
Version 2.0 still at a draft stage, but well advanced.
The OLIF Consortium. (Note: the OLIF Consortium and the SALT group collaborate closely).
Only relatively relevant. One of the main common areas of interest is the
definition of a set of proper identifier for languages. Currently OLIF uses a <language>
element and a <geogUsage>
element.
XLIFF is the XML Localisation Interchange File Format.
Web site: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/xliff.
Allowing the transfer of localizable data extracted from various original files from one stage of the localization process to the next, up to merging the localized data back into its original format.
Example: XLIFFExample.xml
(normally the file uses a .xlf
extension).
Version 1.0 is within days to be moved as a Committee Specification, and to be submitted to be a OASIS Standard.
The XLIFF Technical Committee at OASIS.
There are several common area of interest:
xml:lang
, source-language
,
and target-language
with the same values as for xml:lang
.maxwidth
, maxheight
,
maxbytes
, etc.). It would be very advantageous to have a standard
way of defining such properties, either for a given vocabulary (along with the
rule file or as part of the schema), as well as within any XML document (as a
standard set of attributes and elements belonging to a reserved namespace).
Many of the XLIFF attributes should have a counterpart in this namespace.There are several areas where localization-related formats have currently a need for some kind of standardization that may be relevant for W3C work:
Need for a better mechanism to identify languages and/or locales. Several participants have express some ideas on this topic:
Need for a way to identify the localizable elements and attributes of an XML vocabulary. Several participants have express some ideas on this topic:
Need for a common way to provide additional localization-specific information within XML documents. Several participants have express some ideas on this topic: