[xliff-tools] Re: [The XLIFF Tools project wiki] Update of "Projects/XliffPoGuideDraft2"

[Rodolfo M. Raya]

On Mon, 2005-04-11 at 10:01 +1000, Asgeir Frimannsson wrote:


> So I think we should revert the latest change in the PO Guide.. Any thoughts?


Hi,

I'm not convinced, as the specs are very clear regarding unique names
and this is not contradicted anywhere.

The reply you sent me using <count-group> as an example is also
inconsistent. Name uniqueness is not an obstacle for overriding counts .
They can  be overridden for client, translator, reviewer, etc. using the
"phase-name" attribute.

And regarding the example for domains, it does not show at all why it is
necessary to repeat the context-group name.

So far, you have not provided a simple reason why it is necessary to
repeat a name attribute and I don't know about any tool that requires
repeated names to edit an XLIFF file.

Could you provide a useful use case where it is necessary to allow non-
unique names and mention the XLIFF editor that requires duplicated names
in context groups?

Could you elaborate on how you plan to use the overriding mechanism for
context groups? The specs mention that it is possible to override a
context group, but it does not mention how to implement it, presumably
because none of the companies that conform the XLIFF TC never cared to
implement it or never needed to use it.

Regards,
Rodolfo
-- 
Rodolfo M. Raya <rodolfo at heartsome.net>
Heartsome Holdings Pte Ltd
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xliff-tools/attachments/20050411/4ad0554f/attachment.htm