>>> Is the use of <seg-source> mandatory to
>>> translate an XLIFF 1.2 file?
>>
>> It cannot because <seg-source> is not a mandatory element.
>>
>> The real question is: If there is a <seg-source> in a <trans-unit>, is
>> it mandatory to use it to translate that <trans-unit>?
>
> The real question for me is different. Is the use of segmentation
> based on <seg-source>/<mrk> optional in XLIFF 1.2?
Yes, the use of XLIFF segmentation is optiona: Nothing says a tool must to take advantage of the segmentation provided in <seg-source>.
But maybe you are really asking "Can a tool uses another way than <seg-source> to represent segmentation with a XLIFF 1.2 file?"
There is no sentence in the specification that says: "If a tool supports segmentation, it must use <seg-source> to get or store the segmentation of the <source>." The same way there is no sentence that says "If a tool supports notes, it must read or set <note>."
But <seg-source> is the only segmentation model defined in 1.2, therefore it is logical that a tool would utilize <seg-source> to get or store segmentation information from/in a 1.2 XLIFF document, so it can be interoperable with other tools.
Cheers,
-ys
