possible issue with URN prefixes used to define acceptable namespaces in XLIFF 2.1

Hi all,

I started working on preparing the working draft for incorporation of the newly approved features.

This is issue might be relevant for both ITS support and advanced validation.

In order to support many ITS categories as XLIFF defined modules we will need to include the ITS namespace among XLIFF defined namespaces.

We did that using URN prefixes in XLIFF 2.0, which is not an issue for OASIS namespaces as OASIS does maintain a persistent URN structure. 

However w3c apparently stopped caring for URNs back in 2005 or even earlier.

Now how do we go about accepting these two namespaces:

ITS 2.0 namespace

http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/

ITS-XLIFF namespace

http://www.w3.org/ns/its-xliff/

In the XLIFF TC teleconference, Fredrik and Yves, suggested that we define 1 or 2 OASIS namespaces, XLIFF module namespaces similar to this one: 

urn:oasis:names:tc:xliff:resourcedata:2.0

that will include the subset of the ITS attributes and maybe also elements actually used..

I am not opposed to that as it would allow us to stick to the URN prefix convention that we use in XLIFF 2.0

urn:oasis:names:tc:xliff:its:2.1

urn:oasis:names:tc:xliff:itsxlf:2.1

Fredrik, Yves, would you care to explain how would this work (if at all) with generic ITS processors that would expect the original w3c namespace?

Would we need to include a mapping rule in the XLIFF root? 

I hope that we can agree how the solution would work technically so that we can propose the solution to the W3C ITS IG and discuss if this is acceptable from the W3C point of view.

Thanks and regards

dF

Dr. David Filip

=======================

OASIS XLIFF TC Secretary, Editor, and Liaison Officer 

LRC | CNGL | CSIS

University of Limerick, Ireland

telephone: +353-6120-2781

cellphone: +353-86-0222-158

facsimile: +353-6120-2734

http://www.cngl.ie/profile/?i=452

mailto: