This is a non-binding ballot to measure the opinion of the TC with respect to the architectural direction we should persue with respect to namespace extensions at Source & Target. The result of this ballot will define the direction taken by subcommittees and canonical guide work-in-progress.
We've had discussions in the past regarding providing extension points at source and target, and rejected the proposal because it would complicate interoperability (ie., virtually any type of data could be added to source & target). However, recent discussions on HTML restypes/ctype values and segmentation highlight the significant advantages this option provides, especialy in validation of inline tags. The alternative solution to addressing these requirements would likely require additions or changes to the XLIFF core spec.
The options are: 1/ provide unconstrained namespace extension at Source and Target, 2/ provide extensions at Source & Target only for specific "approved" namespaces (ie., html, xhtml, etc.), or 3/ do not provide any extensions at Source and Target (ie., keep things as they are, perhaps modifying the spec in more limited ways). 4/ No opinion.
The ballot will close at the start of the next TC meeting Tuesday 20 July at 4pmGMT. |
