- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 23:10:50 +0100
- To: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
Am 19.02.13 04:45, schrieb Yves Savourel: > Hi Dave, > >> So: >> a) we might have to support LRQ for mrk in (1) but could >> rule it out of scope for (2) >> b) allowed characters for target would be in (2) and could >> use global rules, but perhaps isn't the case for (1) (unless we >> include the case where we are importing from another bi-text format.) > I still think using global rules in any use case is bad: adding information to an XLIFF document means it may be read by another XLIFF tool, so the case (2) can lead to a case (1). > > Let's put it this way: what can we do with global rules we can't with local markup? > > This also goes back to the discussion about using only global rules to define general mapping and avoiding in for specific instance of data. For example you do <its:provenanceRule selector="//source" etc.../> on a file with only trans-unit/source elements and all is well. Then another tool (not ITS aware) adds alt-trans entries, and suddenly you have also all trans-unit/alt-trans/source elements affected by the provenance. > > I would try to stay away from global rules for XLIFF. (actually try to stay away from global rules that are instance-specific in general). +1. - Felix > > cheers, > -yves > >
Received on Tuesday, 19 February 2013 22:11:13 UTC