Yes, subunit should become subunits Otherwise it's confusing. From the OM point of view each subunit can only hold one source and target.. I fiegured that it's array thing, still it should be renamed to plural.. As the JSON specific terminology starts shaping up, we should start working on the mapping table, whet things are in OM, XLIFF, and JLIFF.. Cheers dF Dr. David Filip =========== OASIS XLIFF OMOS TC Chair OASIS XLIFF TC Secretary, Editor, Liaison Officer Spokes Research Fellow ADAPT Centre KDEG, Trinity College Dublin Mobile: +420-777-218-122 On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 7:45 AM, Phil Ritchie <
phil.ritchie@vistatec.com > wrote: +1 Phil Ritchie Chief Technology Officer Vistatec Vistatec House, 700 South Circular Road, Kilmainham, Dublin 8, Ireland. Tel: +353 1 416 8000 Direct: +353 1 416 8024 Email:
phil.ritchie@vistatec.com www.vistatec.com ISO 9001 ISO 13485 EN 15038 Think Global From: Robert van Engelen [mailto:
engelen@genivia.com ] Sent: 01 March 2017 02:08 To: Chase Tingley <
chase@spartansoftwareinc.com > Cc: Phil Ritchie <
phil.ritchie@vistatec.com >;
xliff-omos@lists.oasis-open. org Subject: Re: [xliff-omos] Feedback on JLIFF examples: aesthetics For consistency it would be an improvement to add “groups”, “units”, and “subunits” in addition to “group”, “unit”, and “subunit”. Same as “notes” and “note”, which are already part of the schema. Dr. Robert van Engelen, CEO/CTO Genivia Inc. voice: (850) 270 6179 ext 104 fax: (850) 270 6179 mobile: (850) 264 2676
engelen@genivia.com On Feb 28, 2017, at 2:41 PM, Chase Tingley <
chase@spartansoftwareinc.com > wrote: I think this is fine, since what these names refer to is not the object themselves, but the array of the object. XLIFF has no corresponding concept -- <unit> really is a "unit", whereas the corresponding data structure in JLIFF is an anonymous object inside an array. So calling that array "units" makes sense. Robert, what do you think? On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 9:29 AM, Phil Ritchie <
phil.ritchie@vistatec.com > wrote: All In familiarizing myself with the examples by writing prototype implementations I would find it more natural if the serialization reads like the objects and properties of my model. Would we not name “unit” and “subunit” as plural as they potentially store multiple sub-objects? Phil Phil Ritchie Chief Technology Officer Vistatec Vistatec House, 700 South Circular Road, Kilmainham, Dublin 8, Ireland. Tel: +353 1 416 8000 Direct: +353 1 416 8024 Email:
phil.ritchie@vistatec.com www.vistatec.com ISO 9001 ISO 13485 EN 15038 Think Global