OASIS XML Localisation Interchange File Format (XLIFF) TC

Hi Klemens, I am happy to help you with your inquiries about XLIFF 2.0. I am also still hopeful that Jaap will pursue the opportunity for TAUS to become a partner with OASIS to facilitate the active participation of TAUS members in the XLIFF TC. As your astute questions indicate, this is a very opportune time for those in our community who wish to improve XLIFF to join in (and sign up)! I will answer some of your questions (embedded) below. And I will cc this list of questions to other members who are best positioned to provide answers to subjects for which they are experts. I am cc'ing the XLIFF TC list to open your questions to their expertise. Among the experts on the list, your questions will reach Yves (as the chair of the Inline Text SC), Rodolfo (as secretary of the TC), David (as your fellow member of TAUS, for one with a unique perspective seeing XLIFF form both points of view), and Helena and Peter (who are closely following the LISA standards). Thanks for your interest, and renewed welcome to you and TAUS to join the TC and help make XLIFF the best it can be for our community! Bryan

Hi Klemens, Some additional feedback to your questions: > 2) I noted that there is a XLIFF Inline Markup SC but no > documents seem to be produced. Is this correct? As Bryan noted, currently we work on the wiki. See http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/OneContentModel And http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/OneContentModel/Comparison > ... I always was a little bit astonished that TMX uses (partially) > different inline mark-ups than XLIFF It's actually XLIFF that uses partially the TMX elements (TMX was out long before XLIFF). The reason for the differences: Both formats were created in different TCs with (partially) different people with (partially) different ideas. And as Bryan said, one of the goals for 2.0 is to try to provide a more general markup that can be used in different containers. > 3) Segmentation: Is it intended to change this segmentation > indicator from mrk to some more meaningful name? See the XSD file attached to http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201104/msg00052.html for the latest 2.0 work-in-progress. It includes the segmentation model we are currently looking at for 2.0. > 8) Term matching: In some cases it might be interesting > to markup special parts of a segment (e.g. a group of words) as a term. > And also with a reference to the target. One could use "mrk" element > for that but looking at the attributes there are many restrictions. The SC is also looking at specializing more the elements in the segment, instead of using a general <mrk>, when it would be relevant. There are however, different possible solutions, using ITS for example, or other methods. > I have to add I do not really understand what non-XLIFF attributes > in " mid, ts, comment, non-XLIFF attributes " really refers too. They refer to extensions: when you see "non-XLIFF attributes" you can use attributes belonging to another namespace than the XLIFF 1.2 namespace. Hope this helps, Cheers, -yves