OASIS XML Localisation Interchange File Format (XLIFF) TC

Feedback for TMX 2.0 proposal, with relation to XLIFF:

The section on the datatype attribute includes a list of pre-defined values and equivalent MIME type values. I am wondering if this
attribute should not be made a MIME type values directly (and maybe its name changed, but that is a lesser issue).

The same goes for XLIFF 2.0.

I see that among the pre-defined data there is "xliff". That speaks volume about the problem we have: If one generates a TMX
document from an XLIFF document it should use the datatype values specify in the XLIFF document in the equivalent datatype
attribute, not "xliff", otherwise we are losing information when going to TMX.

In order to do this both formats have to be using the same values: This is another example of the need to harmonize both formats
into a coherent exchange system.

-ys

On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 20:51:57 -0600
Yves Savourel 

On Fri, 13 Mar 2009 08:58:18 -0300
"Rodolfo M. Raya" 

Hi Rodolfo,

> > I see that among the pre-defined data there is "xliff". That speaks 
> > volume about the problem we have: If one generates a TMX document 
> > from an XLIFF document it should use the datatype values specify in 
> > the XLIFF document in the equivalent datatype attribute, not 
> > "xliff", otherwise we are losing information when going to TMX.
> 
> If the source file for the generated TMX is an XLIFF file, then "xliff"
> should be used.

I disagree.
 

> The original XLIFF could be created from any content. TMX should not 
> care about that.

I think it should care a great deal. Datatype does not indicate from what repository the TMX (or XLIFF) file has been created, it
indicates what type of data (format) of the text.

If I convert an XLIFF entry with datatype="html" to TMX I want to see with datatype="html" in TMX, not datatype="xliff", or I would
lose information.

If I have this in XLIFF: 
It should become something like this in TMX: