OASIS XML Localisation Interchange File Format (XLIFF) TC

 View Only
  • 1.  Suggestion to enhance XSD for XLIFF 1.2.1 (XLIFF 1.2 errata)

    Posted 11-30-2009 14:17
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Hi there,
     
    I noticed that the existing XLIFF XSDs (both strict and transitional) only make limited use of global/named types. Most of the time, the XSDs declare things inline. Example:
     
            <xsd:element name="trans-unit">
                    <xsd:complexType>
                            <xsd:sequence>
                                    <xsd:element ref="xlf:source"/>
                                    <xsd:element ref="xlf:seg-source" minOccurs="0"/>
                                    <xsd:element ref="xlf:target" minOccurs="0"/>
                                    <xsd:choice minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded">
                                            <xsd:element ref="xlf:context-group"/>
                                            <xsd:element ref="xlf:count-group"/>
                                            <xsd:element ref="xlf:note"/>
                                            <xsd:element ref="xlf:alt-trans"/>
                                    </xsd:choice>
                                    <xsd:any namespace="##other" processContents="strict" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
                            </xsd:sequence>
                            <xsd:attribute name="id" type="xsd:string" use="required"/>
                            <!-- more attribute declarations deleted -->
                    </xsd:complexType>
     
    From what I know, global/named types are a good choice in many contexts (amongst others since they facilitate reuse).
     
    Thus, I wonder if we would want to take the opportunity to enhance the XSDs by means of global/named types. Example (first we declare a type, then we use it):
     
            <xsd:complexType name="ElemType_trans-unit">
                    <xsd:sequence>
                            <xsd:element ref="xlf:source"/>
    <!-- more element declarations deleted -->
                    </xsd:sequence>
    <!-- more attribute declarations deleted -->
                    <xsd:attribute name="merged-trans" type="xlf:AttrType_YesNo" use="optional" default="yes"/>
                    <xsd:anyAttribute namespace="##other" processContents="strict"/>
            </xsd:complexType>
     
            <xsd:element name="trans-unit" type="xlf:ElemType_trans-unit">
     
    One example reuse opportunity which can be realized after this change is the following: Variant XLIFF schemas can be defined by means of the “redefine” mechanism. A variant schema may for example come in handy for checking constraints in a processing chain which is not yet completely XLIFF enabled. Example: “target” elements do not get inserted automatically, but rather have to be inserted in advance (see example below thus defines “target” to me mandatory).
     
    <xsd:schema xmlns:xlf="urn:oasis:names:tc:xliff:document:1.2.1" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" targetNamespace="urn:oasis:names:tc:xliff:document:1.2.1" elementFormDefault="qualified" attributeFormDefault="unqualified">
            <xsd:redefine schemaLocation="xliff-core-1.2.1-strict-typed.xsd">
                    <xsd:complexType name="ElemType_trans-unit">
                            <xsd:complexContent>
                                    <xsd:restriction base="xlf:ElemType_trans-unit">
                                            <xsd:sequence>
                                                    <xsd:element ref="xlf:source"/>
                                                    <xsd:element ref="xlf:target"/>
                                            </xsd:sequence>
                                    </xsd:restriction>
                            </xsd:complexContent>
                    </xsd:complexType>
            </xsd:redefine>
    </xsd:schema>
     
    From my understanding, the effort to implement the proposed changes is low – and a couple of supporters exist.
     
    Since the proposed change does not impact “what” we define with the XSD, I would hope that we would be allowed to consider the change for the updated XSDs we intend to publish with the errata for 1.2
     
    It would be great if we could discuss (or possibly even vote) related to this in the near future.
     
    Cheers,
    Christian
    Christian Lieske
    Knowledge Architect
    SAP Language Services (SLS)
    SAP Globalization Services
    SAP AG
    Raiffeisenring 44
    D-68789 St. Leon-Rot
    Germany
    T +49 (62 27) 7 - 6 13 03
    F +49 (62 27) 7
    2 54 18
    mail to:
    christian.lieske@sap.com
    www.sap.com
    Pflichtangaben/Mandatory Disclosure Statements: http://www.sap.com/company/legal/impressum.epx
    Diese E-Mail kann Betriebs- oder Geschäftsgeheimnisse oder sonstige vertrauliche Informationen enthalten. Sollten Sie diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, ist Ihnen eine Kenntnisnahme des Inhalts, eine Vervielfältigung oder Weitergabe der E-Mail ausdrücklich untersagt. Bitte benachrichtigen Sie uns und vernichten Sie die empfangene E-Mail. Vielen Dank.

    This e-mail may contain trade secrets or privileged, undisclosed, or otherwise confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in error, you are hereby notified that any review, copying, or distribution of it is strictly prohibited. Please inform us immediately and destroy the original transmittal. Thank you for your cooperation.
     
     
     


  • 2.  RE: Suggestion to enhance XSD for XLIFF 1.2.1 (XLIFF 1.2 errata)

    Posted 12-01-2009 05:24
    Hi Christian,
    
    This looks quite sound to me, from an XML point of view. I think it is lean and efficient. And as for the impact on the XLIFF 1.2 Errata, to me this surely seems to fit the criteria of "does not cause existing XLIFF 1.2 applications to become invalid." Therefore I see it as a non-substantive change.
    
    We can add this to an XLIFF agenda whenever you'd like to discuss it.
    
    Thanks for the good idea,
    
    Bryan
    ________________________________________
    From: Lieske, Christian [christian.lieske@sap.com]
    Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 6:16 AM
    To: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org
    Subject: [xliff] Suggestion to enhance XSD for XLIFF 1.2.1 (XLIFF 1.2 errata)
    
    Hi there,
    
    I noticed that the existing XLIFF XSDs (both strict and transitional) only make limited use of global/named types. Most of the time, the XSDs declare things inline. Example: