[ https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/XLIFF-28?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=65358#comment-65358 ]
David Filip commented on XLIFF-28:
----------------------------------
Removed the VERSAL editorial comments in the Locale Filter section in Not Represented. The definition of Locale Filter pending the solution for https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/XLIFF-43
> Comments in the draft
> ---------------------
>
> Key: XLIFF-28
> URL: https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/XLIFF-28
> Project: OASIS XML Localisation Interchange File Format (XLIFF) TC
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: ITS Module
> Affects Versions: 2.1_csprd02
> Environment: http://markmail.org/thread/jzdqfm5c6hgofjbu
> Reporter: Yves Savourel
> Assignee: David Filip
> Priority: Minor
> Labels: Proposed, editorial, request_tc_discussion, work_required
> Fix For: 2.1_csprd03
>
>
> There are quite a few (more than a dozen) embedded comments in this latest
> draft:
> e.g: "COMMENT: MAKE CLEAR THAT THERE ARE TWO HANDLINGS, ONE IS NOT TO REPRESENT
> THE DATA CATEGORY, THE OTHER IS IN THE MODULE. THE
> EXTRACTION IS FOR ITS PROCESSORS GENERATING XLIFF, THE DIRECT REPRESENTATION IS
> FOR XLIFF PROCESSORS."
> Some, like the one above, seem to indicate that there are still relatively
> important parts of the text that needs to be
> edited/added/etc.
> I assume this means there will be a csprd03 regardless of the disposition of the
> comments for csprd02. Is that correct?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2.2#6258)
