Hi Yoshito, The core XML Schema defines state attribute like this: <xs:attribute name= state use= optional type= xlf:stateType default= initial /> where xlf:stateType is an enumeration with four values. Your example <segment> <source>Foo</source> <target>Bar</target> </segment> is legal. The fragments <segment> and <segment state= initial > are not equivalent. As the use of state is optional, parsers don't apply the default value when processing a file. So, we are dealing with an XML grammar trick here. Your concerns would be valid if we were still using DTDs to define the grammars. We are using XML Schema now because DTDs can't express what the specification says. The Schematron rules shipped with XLIFF 2.0 / 2.1 are broken due to this XML Schema trick. They say that valid XLIFF files have errors because the state attribute is not properly handled. Regards, Rodolfo -- Rodolfo M. Raya Maxprograms
http://www.maxprograms.com -------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: [xliff] Another spec question - processing requirements for state attribute From: Yoshito Umaoka <
yoshito_umaoka@us.ibm.com > Date: Thu, April 07, 2022 2:10 am To: Rodolfo M. Raya <
rmraya@maxprograms.com >,
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org <
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org > Hi Rodolfo, > 2) If <target> is present in <segment>, the value of state cannot be initial. This is the point I don't like. The spec defines initial as the default value of state . If there are no default value, I can understand the processing requirement above. When we parse XLIFF to runtime representation in tooling code, <segment> and <segment state= initial > should be equivalent. The processing requirement above says: <segment state= initial > <source>Foo</source> <target>Bar</target> </segment> Is illegal. But <segment> <source>Foo</source> <target>Bar</target> </segment> Is above illegal? If we need to handle above two expressions differently, then parser needs to manage two different states state is set and the value is initial and state is not set . If default value is not defined for state attribute, then it makes sense. -Yoshito From: <
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org > on behalf of Rodolfo M. Raya <
rmraya@maxprograms.com > Date: Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 8:06 PM To:
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org <
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: [xliff] Another spec question - processing requirements for state attribute Hello Yoshito, What the spec tries to say is something like this: 1) If a <segment> does not have <target>, the only possible value for state is initial 2) If <target> is present in <segment>, the value of state ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart This Message Is From an External Sender This message came from outside your organization. ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd Hello Yoshito, What the spec tries to say is something like this: 1) If a <segment> does not have <target>, the only possible value for state is initial 2) If <target> is present in <segment>, the value of state cannot be initial. I really don't like how the _expression_ if and only if is used in the specification. It is not as clear as what you can express with two conditions like the ones above. I don't think state can be explicitly set to initial when there is a <target> because the target must contain a translation for the sibling <source>, which means it can't be empty and therefore it can't be in initial state. And you are probably right about the errors in the examples. We need to validate them all. Regards, Rodolfo -- Rodolfo M. Raya Maxprograms
http://www.maxprograms.com -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [xliff] Another spec question - processing requirements for state attribute From: Yoshito Umaoka <
yoshito_umaoka@us.ibm.com > Date: Wed, April 06, 2022 7:04 pm To:
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org <
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org >
http://docs.oasis-open.org/xliff/xliff-core/v2.1/os/xliff-core-v2.1-os.html#state The processing requirements section has a statement: Writers MUST NOT set the state attribute values to other than the default initial if and only if the <segment> element where the attribute is set doesn't have the <target> child. I'm struggling to interpret only if part. Above statement seems to tell If <segment> does not have <target>, writers must not set state attribute other than initial . I understand this requirement. If <segment> has <target>, writers must not set state= initial . This is my interpretation of the part only if . My interpretation 2 is correct, I think many examples in XLIFF 2.1 seem to violate the processing requirement, because the default value of state attribute is initial . <segment> (with no attributes) is equivalent to <segment state= initial >, because the default value of state attribute is initial . So the segment like below (found in the XLIFF specification) does not look right, because <segment> status should be interpreted as initial <xliff xmlns= urn:oasis:names:tc:xliff:document:2.0 version= 2.0 srcLang= en trgLang= fr > <file id= f1 > <notes> <note id= n1 >note for file.</note> </notes> <unit id= u1 > <my:elem xmlns:my= myNamespaceURI id= x1 >data</my:elem> <notes> <note id= n1 >note for unit</note> </notes> <segment id= s1 > <source><pc id= 1 >Hello <mrk id= m1 type= term >World</mrk>!</pc> </source> <target><pc id= 1 >Bonjour le <mrk id= m1 type= term >Monde</mrk> ! </pc></target> </segment> </unit> </file> </xliff> If the processing requirement statement says MUST NOT set the state attribute values to other than the default initial EXPLICITLY , then it somewhat makes sense. But at the same time, from the tool developer's point of view, distinction between implicitly set (default value) or explicitly set is often not clear sometimes. I personally think changing the statement to Writers MUST NOT set the state attribute values to other than the default initial if the <segment> element where the attribute is set doesn't have the <target> child. (dropping only if ) might resolve the conflict. In other words, state= initial can be still used even <target> exists, but if <target> is absent, state must be initial . Again, is my interpretation wrong? -Yoshito --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php