So does this mean we're looking at something more like the <itag> proposal Rodolfo and I made for TMX that used only a single tag that could optionally encapsulate content? If so, I can dust off the proposal we made then and see what loose change it has in its pockets that we can use ;-)
I’m not arguing to reuse it (unless it turns out to have been a work of stunning brilliance due to Rodolfo’s influence, which is entirely possible) but just to see what might have been useful in it.
-Arle
On Oct 26, 2011, at 09:52 , Andrzej Zydron wrote:
Hi Bryan, Rudolfo and
Arle,
I would like to carry this through also into TMX 2.0, which I will
be working on in November. Then we will finally have a sane and
secure way of handling inline coding between XLIFF and TMX.
Rodolfo's point is imminently correct: only <g> is
absolutely necessary. I am still mulling over <x/>. What do
the rest of the committee think?
Best Regards,
Andrzej Zydroń
CTO
XTM International
