- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2006 23:37:44 +0900
- To: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@translate.com>
- Cc: "'Lieske, Christian'" <christian.lieske@sap.com>, public-i18n-its@w3.org
Received on Thursday, 6 April 2006 14:38:47 UTC
Yves Savourel wrote: >>> 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. I assumed the same, and think that even if the external file has the <rules> files as the root element, it would not need special treatment. - Felix > > -ys > > >
Received on Thursday, 6 April 2006 14:38:47 UTC