Re: [xliff-comment] Standards-based representation of term translations based on XLIFF 2.1 glossary module in XLIFF 1.2

I am forwarding this reply on behalf of Rodolfo. The email systems rejected the copy to the xliff-comment@ mailing list. Christian was replied to directly so this is just to ensure the email is on the record.Â

/chet

--- forwarded reply ---Â

Date:ÂJuly 22, 2020 at 5:05:42 PM GMT-3

To:Â"Lieske, Christian" <>

Cc:Â"" <>

Hello Christian,

From XLIFF 1.2 point of view, the element <gls:glossary> is a non-XLIFF element. As such, it can be added at the end of a <trans-unit> and used to store term data in the way you suggest. That is something explicitly allowed.

What you canât expect is to enforce the rules for glossaries defined in XLIFF 2.x in an XLIFF 1.2 document.

Regards,
Rodolfo M. Raya

On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 4:22 AM Lieske, Christian <> wrote:

Hi,

The example in http://docs.oasis-open.org/xliff/xliff-core/v2.1/os/xliff-core-v2.1-os.html#glossary-module indicates that translations of terms - e.g. encoded in a terminology database - can be inside an XLIFF 2.1 "trans-unit".

I wonder if the XLIFF 1.2 "trans-unit" extension point could be used in a similar vein.

With XLIFF 1.2 on could get something like

         Â<trans-unit id="1">

             <source>

                This indicator is only necessary for

                <mrk id="m1" mtype="term" type="term">manual depreciation</mrk>

                .

             </source>

             <gls:glossary>

                <gls:glossEntry

                id="http://www.example.com/def/termbase/e12"

                   ref="#m1">

                   <gls:term

                   source="http://www.example.com/def/termbase/t975">manual depreciation</gls:term>

                   <gls:translation

                   source="http://www.example.com/def/termbase/t769">manuelle Abschreibung</gls:translation>

                </gls:glossEntry>

             </gls:glossary>

         Â</trans-unit>

Looking at the XLIFF 1.2 "trans-unit" specification "As content, Zero, one or more non-XLIFF elements [are allowed]" (see http://docs.oasis-open.org/xliff/v1.2/os/xliff-core.html#trans-unit), I wonder whether the use of the XLIFF 2.1 "glossary" element in XLIFF 1.2 would be OK, since one could take the position that it is an XLIFF element.

Would be great to get perspectives on this.

Cheers,

Christian

-- 

This publicly archived list offers a means to provide input to the

OASIS XML Localisation Interchange File Format (XLIFF) TC.

In order to verify user consent to the Feedback License terms and

to minimize spam in the list archive, subscription is required

before posting.

Subscribe: 

Unsubscribe: 

List help: 

List archive: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff-comment/

Feedback License: http://www.oasis-open.org/who/ipr/feedback_license.pdf

List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php

Committee: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=xliff

Join OASIS: http://www.oasis-open.org/join/

-- 

/chetÂ
----------------

Chet Ensign

Chief Technical Community Steward
OASIS: Advancing open source & open standards for the information society
http://www.oasis-open.org

Mobile: +1 201-341-1393Â