Magnus and all:
Thanks for the recommendations.
The revision to 1.2 is being introduced
specifically to add segmentation support into the 1.1 spec. While we’ve
got the hood (or bonnet) open, it also makes sense to add a few bug fixes and
clarifications. If your suggestions don’t generate much
controversy, then I think we can make some of the recommended changes in the
spec. Given that our TC focus is on submitting XLIFF to the official standards
process, if we can’t agree on these changes by the next TC meeting, then I
suggest we set them aside to discuss at the next XLIFF revision.
My personal observations and opinions on
your recommendations are as follows:
1: I prefer to keep coord, style, exstyle,
extype in the spec as they’re resources that are quite generic across technologies.
I think it’s much easier and more efficient than using “context”
to track this information.
2. No opinion
3. Seems like a good idea. I will think
a bit more on it to see if it has any negative implications that aren’t
readily obvious.
4. No opinion. You make some good
points though…
5. I disagree – I think the “restype”
attribute is a very useful (critical, really) attribute. Although using “context”
is feasible to track the resource type information, it’s just not nearly
as simple and effective as the existing “restype”. If this
recommendation was adopted, presumably we would have to modify “context”
to be required as well. I think this one should stay as it is... but
let’s hear the opinion of other TC members.
Regards,
Tony