W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-its@w3.org > April to June 2006

RE: Versioning

From: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@translate.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 08:35:41 -0600
To: "'Lieske, Christian'" <christian.lieske@sap.com>, "'Felix Sasaki'" <fsasaki@w3.org>
Cc: <public-i18n-its@w3.org>
Message-ID: <001f01c65987$617cbe60$8f05a8c0@Breizh>

>> I still see a need for a version attribute on the rules element 
>> (beneficial for example for linked rules files since those files 
>> otherwise would not have an indicator to which version they belong).
> we decided to link via a xlink attribute which points to a file. 
> If the top element of that file has a version attribute, you will 
> take the version. If not, the version is the one indicated at the 
> top element of the including file.
> Where is the problem / tricky case with this solution?
CL> The top-level elements of the file to which the xlink goes is
CL> "rules", right?
CL> In that case, you would have/need the version element on "rules".

Mmmm... It could be (and I think it will be in most of the cases).

But so far I have assumed you could also link to files that have <rules> but are not necessarily only that. For example you could
link to the XML Schema, couldn't you?
Or to some kind of user-defined XML document that include ITS rules along with other things (general instructions for the localizer,
whatever...). The ITS processor would not care sinnce it looks only to the <rules> element(s?) there.

Received on Thursday, 6 April 2006 14:35:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:43:07 UTC