This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
The i18n WG has sent email[1] asking if there might be some method for allowing the tags of XSDL to be translated into other languages (making the same request of other W3C XML languages as well). The WG declined to make the "tag mapping" a part of XSDL per se, but did agree to continue discussion of the possibility of developing some mechanism for making this mapping possible after last call. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2008Apr/0004.html
*** Bug 5875 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
On the WG call of 1 August, 2008 (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2008Aug/0001.html), the XML Schema WG asked that I write a disposition and then forward it to i18n. The WG asked me to write this disposition because I am inclined to agree with the need for some mechanisms to support the "translation" of XML languages, but that I also understand why the XML Schema WG is classifying this issue for "future" consideration. First, the WG believes that there are actually two separate issues implicit in the note: 1) The "mapping" of XML languages using natural language keywords into other natural languages. 2) The naming of "anonymous" objects so that they can be referenced. The second issue is referenced indirectly, and the WG would consider a new Bugzilla entry on that subject. We will not consider it further as a part of the current issue. As for issue 1 (the "mapping" issue), the WG prefers to classify this topic as future work. While it seems that such a feature could be useful, it also seems that the ability to do such mapping would benefit all standardized XML languages, and not just XSDL. The WG would like to consider a more consistent solution to the problem, and not create a "one-off" solution. Some of the potential solutions to the problem include: 1) defining alternative natural language terms and require (or not) people building processors to accept those terms in addition to those defined in XSDL. "Conformance" is a key consideration here. 2) providing stylesheets to translate one set of terms to another. 3) placing such "term lists" or stylesheets under the perview of the W3C and introducing a standard way to introduce new "term lists" for languages not previously supported. We hope that the i18n WG understands our hesitance to "bake-in" a specific XSDL solution for some specific alternative language or set of languages, especially since this issue applies to all standardized XML languages.