W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-mobileok-checker@w3.org > May 2007

Error Text (was RE: Checker Home Page and Regular Teleconference Details)

From: Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 18:25:30 +0100
Message-ID: <C8FFD98530207F40BD8D2CAD608B50B42B4375@mtldsvr01.DotMobi.local>
To: <public-mobileok-checker@w3.org>



>> > 3) error messages
> > > OK, in a thread before I wrote an example with XInclude.
> > > When writing the XSLT, I noticed that using the document()
function
> > > is much easier.
> > > What do you think?
> >
> > I had in mind using xsl:import (or include) on the relevant language
> resource and that file could contain variables for each of the errors.
Or
> the string could be generated by an XPath on a document() that is the
> value-of some variable, if you see what I mean. Not sure of te
benefits of
> each of those approaches.
> 
> This is for error text? the current implementation leverage's Java's
> message bundles for this. It's straightforward, clear, puts messages
> in one place, and is easily internationalizable. I'm not against
> another approach, just want to see a reason it's as good as the
> current approach.
> 
Yes, I see the approach, but while I don't want to give away the
advantages of Java message bundles, I think the XSLT would be more
useful if it could be run independently of the framework. E.g. if
someone decided to generate a moki document, they could then run the
tests in turn by calling them from an XSLT, rather than from the
framework. 

Cheers
Jo 
Received on Thursday, 17 May 2007 17:25:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:13:03 GMT