MHonArc v2.4.5 -->
xliff message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Re: [xliff] Final Consolidated Restype Attributes List
Title:
Hi all:
We've returned to this discussion more than a few times in the past couple
of months. After our most recent discussion of this topic, I believe it
was left that we would explicitly list all possible restypes. I personally
take the view that the list should be normalized down to less granular categories
or what Mark calls "root restypes". Anything requiring a more specific or
granular definition should be added via attribute namespace extension.
What's the consensus of the group on this issue? If we're split, then I
can set up a ballot using our new Kavi system, and we can determine consensus
that way. This needs to be resolved before we move on.
Regards,
Tony
Lieske, Christian wrote:
Hi all,
It might make sense to say a word again about
my original motivation for including both
XUL- and XSD-related items:
I was assuming that we where looking for a kind
of 'superset' of items to which items from specific
sets (e.g. those belonging to Windows RC files)
could be mapped. My specific line of thought was
to create mapping tables which reveal how the
individual sets would be mapped to the superset.
This
approach appealed to me since on the one
hand the superset would give us a comprehensive layer of
abstraction, and the mapping tables
would leave no doubt about what representations for example
of Windows RC items have
to look like in XLIFF.
The only alternative to this 'superset and mandatory
mapping' approach to me would be the consequent
use of the namespace mechanism (which for example
might render Windows RC specific information
in XLIFF as 'item="winRC:X"'). Of course this
alternative approach could boil down to a completely
different approach
for tool suppliers. Possibly,
they would no longer work on rendering XLIFF, but would look into XLIFF
files,
see that they are really 'wrappers' for say
Windows RC files, and then would use Windows RC
related functionality for further processing.
Best,
Christian
Hi Tony,
After having another look through this
list I feel I have to raise a concern I have towards including all of the
XUL elements and the granularity it provides for XUL, which we are not necessarily
be providing for other formats (I would not be too kean on reading the list
if we went down that road).
Basically, including all of the XUL elements
includes too many spurious values that may never be used.
An example of my concern is evident in
the following list of XUL elements
tree
treecell
treecol
treecols
treeitem
treerow
treechildren
Here the actual resource type is a tree
control described by the first element, <tree>. All of the rest of
these elements then describe aspects of the tree control and can only exist
as child elements of <tree> in XUL. Extending on this, <treecols>
in XUL is just a placeholder for containing multiple <treecol> elements
and therefore provides no specific useful information in XLIFF and I cannot
see how it could ever be used.
IMHO, I see the following options:
1. Prune the list of XUL elements to
only include root 'restypes', such as <tree> in the above example
and further reduce the list through commonality with the other non-XUL values.
2. Add one 'XUL' restype and indicate
that the actual XUL type be specified through an additional namespaced attribute
via an attribute extension point
3. Use only XUL elements
4. Leave the extensive list as is (ouch!)
Regards,
Mark Levins
IBM Software Group,
Dublin Software Laboratory,
Airways Industrial Estate,
Cloghran,
Dublin 17,
Ireland. |
Phone: +353 1 704
6676
IBM Tie Line 166676 |
All:
Please review the attached HTML and Excel spreadsheet
for legibility,
accuracy and completeness.
Please note that I've assigned as owner the original
submittor, or
subsequent resubmittor, or in some cases my best guess as to who may
own the item. I may not have gotten the owners quite right, so it's up
to you to review to make sure any items important to you are represented
correctly. Also, please forgive me if I've omitted mention of your
name as submitter - I will correct any mistakes once they're reported to
me. Anyone is free to submit their suggestions - responses are not
limited to assigned owners.
I'd prefer if you return to me the XLS file rather
than HTML file.
Please indicate if the item should have status of
Approved,Deprecated,Rejected. Please fill in a description
when one is
lacking, or feel free to edit the existing description. And finally,
please fill in your name in next to the item you're
reviewing and feel
free to add any comments in the appropriate column.
The end of day Friday (per any timezone you like) is
the cutoff for
returning to me your signed off lists. After this deadline, any items
not explicitly approved will be assumed to be rejected.
Regards,
Tony
--
Tony Jewtushenko mailto:tony.jewtushenko@oracle.com
Sr. Tools Program Manager direct tel: +353.1.8039080
Product Management - Tools Technology Team
Oracle Corporation, Ireland
[attachment "restype-all-rc2.xls" deleted
by Mark Levins/Ireland/IBM]
--
Tony Jewtushenko mailto:tony.jewtushenko@oracle.com
Sr. Tools Program Manager direct tel: +353.1.8039080
Product Management - Tools Technology Team
Oracle Corporation, Ireland
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]