|
Hi Mark and all:
"XLIFF does not currently provide a mechanism for
the localization of localizable data in the absence of text. It is also
inelegant and unintuitive in its approach to modifiable data associated with
text and lacks the ability to indicate the presence of modifiable or, more
importantly, non-modifiable data".
Unless I'm missing something,
XLIFF already provides an adequate means for localizing localizable
data in the absence of text. If a trans-unit is marked as
"translate=no", and the source and target are left empty of text
(ie, absent of text), then why can't the coord, style,
css-style, etc., attributes be specified at the trans-unit (indicating
source value) and, if different, the target (indicating
localized value) level? Some of this issue was covered by the recent
xliff comments mailing list discussion, but I thought the only issue
remaining unresolved is identifying attributes that could or couldn't be
changed in the target. There were some additional discussions
about defining standard profiles to be used as templates for specific
resource types, but that doesn't specifically preclude support for
"localizable data in the absence of text".
Can you please expand on your statement?
We (at Oracle) make frequent use
of text-absent trans-units, and once the reformat issue is
resolved (per, say, Doug's suggestion) I don't grok any remaining
limitations that would limit XLIFF from supporting any "localizable data in
the absence of text". In fact, the solution is quite elegant and
easy to read, in my opinion, and I'm not sure that significant
architectural changes at any point in the future would improve it. Why
doesn't </source translate="no"></target coord=x,y,x1,y1>
work?
Regards,
Tony
This thread already has a best answer. Would you like to mark this message as the new best answer?
|