Details

    • Proposal:
      Hide

      Work out better ITS rules
      Keep as partial overlap

      Show
      Work out better ITS rules Keep as partial overlap
    • Resolution:
      Hide

      Agreed to keep as partial overlap by consensus in meeting 21st March 2017

      Show
      Agreed to keep as partial overlap by consensus in meeting 21st March 2017

      Description

      The ITS Localization Note data category in section: 5.9.7.1 Localization Note.
      There are various issues IMO with it:

      – Wrong category?

      That is in the set of data categories "that have a partial overlap with XLIFF
      features", but there is no ITSM elements or attribute
      defined. So what is the 'partial overlap'? If that data category can be mapped
      using only ITS rules and XLIFF elements/attributes it
      should be in the category " ITS data categories available through XLIFF Core and
      other Modules". If that is not the case then it
      should be in the category "ITS data categories not represented in XLIFF"

      – Warning for for <sm>:

      The second paragraph of the warning the the section says:

      "While XLIFF Core <note> elements apply to the whole content of the structural
      element where it was placed in the business sense, it
      doesn't technically inherit in the XML sense. The scopes of the Comment
      Annotation mechanism will differ where the unextended ITS
      Processors cannot identify pseudo-spans formed by <sm/> / <em/> pairs, the scope
      will be the same on the well-formed <mrk> spans.
      The content and type of the Localization Note will be always mapped properly."

      Why this specific warning. It's no different than for all ITS data categories.
      But the other data categories don't have a specific
      warning.

      The term "unextended ITS processor" is very confusing: We should not assume
      anything about extension of ITS processors.

      The term "in the business sense" is also very weird.

      IMO: There should be one general note about the issue of the <sm> scope that
      explains the problem and states the limitation of the
      ITS processor with that element (with any data category).

      – The scope problem of XLIFF <note>:

      The scope <note> and the one for ITS Localization Note are different. In XLIFF
      <note> applies to either to source or target (and--I
      assume--to everything if appliesTo is not defined (the default)).
      For IT'S THE note applies to the textual content of the element, including child
      elements, but excluding attributes.
      So essentially kind of the same as when appliesTo is not defined.

      Unless there is a way to have a ITS rules that manage to handle the
      appliesTo='source' and appliesTo='target' we don't have a
      semantics equivalence.

      – ITS rule in
      http://docs.oasis-open.org/xliff/xliff-core/v2.1/csprd02/schemas/its.sch

      Currently we have:

      <its:locNoteRule selector="//xlf:note" localizationNotePointer="self::*"
      locNoteType="description"/>

      But that doesn't take XLIFF priority into account, nor appliesTo.

        Attachments

          Activity

            People

            • Assignee:
              fsasaki Felix Sasaki [X] (Inactive)
              Reporter:
              ysavourel Yves Savourel [X] (Inactive)
            • Watchers:
              2 Start watching this issue

              Dates

              • Due:
                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: