Re: Sun Translation tool (Was: Re: Heartsome XLIFF Translation Editor for document translation?)

[Asgeir Frimannsson <asgeirf redhat com>]

On Thursday 02 December 2004 03:11, Rodolfo M. Raya wrote:
> > I have allready started to map out a possible mapping of PO to XLIFF [3],
> > but this needs review and I'm now looking closer at how other tools
> > handles this file format.
>
> I looked at your page and found that the proposed mapping is very
> dangerous. You use a custom namespace, valid according to XLIFF rules
> but a huge problem because foreign namespaces in an XLIFF file are
> intended to be tool specific. If you use your own namespace, you will
> have to write your own tool to handle it.

I actually agree with this. Using foreign namespaces for this is bad (BUT: 
tools should be able to handle these files and ignore the foreign 
namespaces). As said, we need to find a proper mapping for these to XLIFF.

> > I think it's really exciting that SUN is releasing their tools as open
> > source, and the Lite edition of Heartsome is also a good editor (esp. for
> > docbook). Hopefully we can cooperate so that when we eventually 'replace'
> > the PO based localization processes in larger projects such as Gnome and
> > KDE, translators can use their editor of choice, and not have to stick
> > with one editor because of lack of standards based xliff representations.
>
> XLIFF standard defines file format quite well. If you have a valid XLIFf
> file without custom tagging, any XLIFF-enabled editor should be able to
> translate it.
>
> I examined XLIFF files generated by several commercial/free tools and
> 95% of them can be edited with any XLIFF-enabled translation program.
> The key is to restrict the selection of elements/attributes used in the
> file to a simple subset of XLIFF 1.0 and XLIFF 1.1 .
>
> Keep me posted about your plans for a XLIFF related project. I would
> gladly help if I can.

Thanks for that, will keep you updated on the project.

> Regards,
> Rodolfo