OASIS XML Localisation Interchange File Format (XLIFF) TC

  • 1.  csprd02 comment: XLIFF as a processing format for CAT tools

    Posted 10-04-2013 19:33
    I am worried that the statement that XLIFF is only intended for data exchange could endanger tools that use XLIFF as native format.

    Writer, Writer Agent:

    "Note
    Since XLIFF is intended as an exchange format rather than a processinmg format, many applications will need to generate XLIFF Documents from their internal processing formats, even in cases when they are processing XLIFF Documents created by another Extractor."

    Can this language be recast in order to encourage CAT tools to still use XLIFF as a native format?

    Thanks,

    Bryan




  • 2.  RE: [xliff-comment] csprd02 comment: XLIFF as a processing format for CAT tools

    Posted 10-04-2013 21:07
    Hi Bryan, > Can this language be recast in order to encourage > CAT tools to still use XLIFF as a native format? I had no idea we were encouraging CAT tools to use XLIFF as a native format. XLIFF is only an exchange format. If some tools choose to use it as their processing format that is fine and well. We shouldn't discourage it. But I don't think we should encourage it either: it's not the purpose of XLIFF. Cheers, -yves
    Original Message


  • 3.  RE: [xliff] RE: [xliff-comment] csprd02 comment: XLIFF as a processing format for CAT tools

    Posted 10-04-2013 21:41
    Yves, Your words are much better and clearer than mine. Let's use yours as the proposal. "If some tools choose to use it {XLIFF} as their processing format that is fine and well. We shouldn't discourage it." I fear the wording I cited discourages. Thanks for improving my bad wording, Bryan ________________________________________ From: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org [xliff@lists.oasis-open.org] on behalf of Yves Savourel [ysavourel@enlaso.com] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2013 2:07 PM To: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [xliff] RE: [xliff-comment] csprd02 comment: XLIFF as a processing format for CAT tools Hi Bryan, > Can this language be recast in order to encourage > CAT tools to still use XLIFF as a native format? I had no idea we were encouraging CAT tools to use XLIFF as a native format. XLIFF is only an exchange format. If some tools choose to use it as their processing format that is fine and well. We shouldn't discourage it. But I don't think we should encourage it either: it's not the purpose of XLIFF. Cheers, -yves
    Original Message


  • 4.  RE: [xliff] RE: [xliff-comment] csprd02 comment: XLIFF as a processing format for CAT tools

    Posted 10-07-2013 14:52
    Hi Bryan, Nice try. But that would be missing the other part of the statement which says we shouldn't encourage it either. In my humble opinion, this is one of those notes that brings little to the specification (the use case underlined by the note is already expressed by including Modifier and Enricher agents in the main text). Cheers, -yves
    Original Message


  • 5.  RE: [xliff] RE: [xliff-comment] csprd02 comment: XLIFF as a processing format for CAT tools

    Posted 10-07-2013 15:14
    Hi Yves, I agree with your opinion. Killing the note would solve the problem for me. Thanks, Bryan ________________________________________ From: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org [xliff@lists.oasis-open.org] on behalf of Yves Savourel [ysavourel@enlaso.com] Sent: Monday, October 07, 2013 7:51 AM To: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [xliff] RE: [xliff-comment] csprd02 comment: XLIFF as a processing format for CAT tools Hi Bryan, Nice try. But that would be missing the other part of the statement which says we shouldn't encourage it either. In my humble opinion, this is one of those notes that brings little to the specification (the use case underlined by the note is already expressed by including Modifier and Enricher agents in the main text). Cheers, -yves
    Original Message


Related Content