Reformat
Summary of Options
Objective
Additional elements such as font, coord need
to be associated with source and target
There are 4 proposals that I shall call
1)
Siblings
2)
Restructure
3)
Embedded��
4)
Combined
Option 1 -
Siblings
The <source-info> and <target-info>
elements
Are made siblings of <source> and
<target>
<trans-unit id="Option 1"
translate="yes >
<source>Source
Text</source>
<source-info>
<coord>
<x
reformat = �no�>x </x>
<y
reformat = �no�>y</y>
<cx
reformat = �yes�>cx </x>
<cy
reformat = �yes�>cy</y>
</coord>
</source-info>
��������� <target>
Translated Text </target>
<target-info>
<coord>
<cx>cx
</x>
<cy�>cy</y>
</coord>
</ target-info >
</trans-unit>
Issues
1)
Is Fully 1.0 compliant
2)
Two extra elements are required, each containing the
same elements
Option 2 �
Restructure
Completely new structures are used
The text element replaces the existing source
and target elements
<trans-unit id="Option 2"
translate="yes">
<source-info>
<text>Unable
to store persistent object</text>
<coord>
<x
reformat = �no�>x </x>
<y
reformat = �no�>y</y>
<cx
reformat = �yes�>cx </x>
<cy
reformat = �yes�>cy</y>
</coord>
</source-info>
��������� <target-info>
<text>Unable
to store persistent object translated</text>
<coord>
<cx>cx
</x>
<cy�>cy</y>
</coord>
</ target-info>
</trans-unit>
Issues
1)
Is not compatible with 1.0
2)
Has clean structure
Option 3 �
Embedded
The existing source and target elements can
contain additional elements within their content
The actual �Text� is found between the
closing brace of the last additional element and the <\target> mark
The following example also shows how white
space issues will need to be handled
The extra elements need to be specified and
implemented in a specified order, e.g. <coord>, <font>,
<�.>text
<trans-unit id="Option 1"
translate="yes >
<source><coord>
<x
reformat = �no�>x </x>
<y
reformat = �no�>y</y>
<cx
reformat = �yes�>cx </x>
<cy
reformat = �yes�>cy</y>
</coord>Source
Text</source>
<target><coord>
<cx>cx
</x>
<cy�>cy</y>
</coord>
Translated Text </target>
</trans-unit>
Issues
1)
is fully compatible with 1.0
2)
Is messy
Option 4 �
Combined
Option 2 is combined with existing 1.0
structures
The schema says that a trans-unit contains
either
<source> and
<target>
or
<source-info> and
<target-info>
Issues
1)
Is fully compatible with 1.0
2)
Is the cleanest implementation
3)
Will require the most complex schema definition