Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Consider mapping babelon more closely after xliff spec #16

Open
matentzn opened this issue Jul 5, 2022 · 0 comments
Open

Consider mapping babelon more closely after xliff spec #16

matentzn opened this issue Jul 5, 2022 · 0 comments

Comments

@matentzn
Copy link
Member

matentzn commented Jul 5, 2022

It seems to me that other than its tools and preferred serialisations, XLIFF is a pretty good, comprehensive format and we should maintain a decent 1:1 mapping with it, if not basically pick all its good parts.

@victoriasoesanto nothing needs to be done about this right now, but let us keep this in mind moving forward: any evolution of the spec should be done only after a careful review of the XLIFF spec.

We should also add mappings to all babelon element to XLIFF, such as xliff:state.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@matentzn