Clytie is right. XLIFF is getting more and more used in the industry.
As a replacement for TTX I suppose.
Jean-Christophe
On 11 janv. 07, at 16:25, Clytie Siddall wrote:
On 10/01/2007, at 10:03 PM, Kazunari Hirano wrote:
On 1/10/07, Clytie Siddall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
XLIFF is alre
On 10/01/2007, at 10:03 PM, Kazunari Hirano wrote:
On 1/10/07, Clytie Siddall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
XLIFF is already the standard in professional translation, ...
Is this true? How did you know that?
As far as I know, this is certainly the case. I have often seen it
mentioned in pro
On 1/10/07, Clytie Siddall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
XLIFF is already the standard in professional translation, ...
Is this true? How did you know that?
Thanks,
khirano
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For addition
XLIFF has a lot of advantages, and it makes sense to support the
standards. If OpenOffice.org supports OpenDocument, it should
certainly support XLIFF.
Can you please explain this logic to me?
Do you mena you should be able to work with XLIFF files from OOo? Or?
How is OpenDocument connect
On 10/01/2007, at 5:54 AM, Ain Vagula wrote:
David Fraser wrote:
Ain Vagula wrote:
Yury Tarasievich wrote:
On 08/01/07, Eike Rathke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I don't know if XLIFF could serve us in the translation
process. It
might be interesting in the long run for localization data
David Fraser wrote:
> Ain Vagula wrote:
>> Yury Tarasievich wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 08/01/07, Eike Rathke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
I don't know if XLIFF could serve us in the translation process. It
might be interesting in the long run for localization data exchange.
