> For PIs generated during the XLIFF file creation
> process, wouldn't an XLIFF reader have to support
> preserving the PIs, since PIs are a standard XML item?
> The XML Specification states ( http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#sec-pi ): > "PIs are not part of the document's character data, but
> MUST be passed through to the application." The XML parser must pass them through to the application, which then do what it wants with them. I was assuming an XLIFF reader is already an application. The problem with preserving PIs in inline content is that a tool would have to keep track of them. But I suppose they could be passed as some kind of annotation, just like a marker for a term, or a comment for instance. What I'm a bit concerned about is that tools start using PIs for placing extensions. But I suppose also that, once processed, there is not many differences between an extension in a general-purpose inline marker, and a PI. For example, the mapping for the two notations below would probably be very similar. <target>My <mrk myNS:info='flag'>translated</mrk> text</target> <target>My <?myFlagStart?>translated<?myFlagEnd?> text</target> Hmmm... I guess this needs more thinking. -ys
