I don't have a recommendation one way or the other. But I can offer a use case that might have some bearing. In my case, I am an implementer, not localization service provider. One of the things I do is to automate the transformation of source XML to XLIFF, and the transformation of translated XLIFF back to source (improving my cost model by shielding the LSP from complexity). Element-by-element recommendations would help me in this task.
From: Grosso, Paul [mailto:pgro...@ptc.com]
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 4:16 PM
Subject: [dita] RE: Element-by-element recommendations for translators
From: JoAnn Hackos [mailto:joan...@comtech-serv.com]
Sent: Monday, 2009 October 12 18:06
To: dita; Grosso, Paul
Subject: Element-by-element recommendations for translators
Topic: Element-by-element recommendations for translators
Paul Grosso commented that this topic does not belong in the Arch
However, this topic is essential for localization service providers to
know how to correctly set their systems to include or exclude certain
elements from the translation workbench. We specifically requested
it be added to DITA 1.1.
Why should this topic be excluded? I also don't see why it is a
for the Adoption TC since it is a requirement for implementers.
Implementors of the DITA spec? Or localization service providers?
In any case, what does this have to do with DITA architecture?
I would imagine this large topic is of no use/interest to most
DITA implementors. If none of this topic is normative as far as
basic implementation of the DITA standard is concerned, then perhaps
it should be an informative appendix to the language spec.