Hi,
With an incomplete view of the discussion (I don't have all details), I just want to say that in my experience a pair like <sc>/<ec> is not really needed and it is possible to handle all cases with a well designed single tag, like the proposed <pc>. The key is in having a good set of attributes with a well designed processing expectation.
Best,
Rodolfo
--
Rodolfo M. Raya
Maxprograms http://www.maxprograms.com
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [xliff] RE: [xliff-inline] Representing information for the
starting/ending/standalone parts
From: "Schnabel, Bryan S" <>
Date: Sat, October 08, 2011 8:41 pm
To: "" <>
Hi Yves,
I really understand what you're saying. I just have three short comments:
1)
> > (1) <sc>/<ec> alone or
> > (2) both <sc>/<ec> and <pc>?
> > . . . or (I thought I heard) (3) <pc> alone with attributes to also
> > carry the load of <sc>/<ec>
> There is no option (3). We cannot represent spans segmented at the
> middle with <pc>...</pc> no matter what attributes it would carries.
Exactly! I think we've gone the long way around to make my point. <pc> can be made to work across spanned segments with proper attributes (example will follow). But using <pc> across segments is as (in my opinion) ill-suited as using <sc>/<ec> in a single segment.
I could do this:
<p>These skis are good in <slang> Crud. Powder and packed powder</slang> would be better served by another ski.</p>
=
<seg>These skis are good in <pc fuct='start' id='s1' /> Crud.</seg>
<seg>Powder and packed powder<pc fuct='end' idref='s1' /> would be better served by another ski</seg>
Okay, so I've gone out of my way to com up with a silly example, but I only
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:
