Hi,
I would agree that "original" should be an optional attribute.
Regards,
Fredrik Estreen
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [mailto:] On Behalf
> Of Rodolfo M. Raya
> Sent: den 4 juli 2012 19:19
> To:
> Subject: RE: [xliff] original attribute
>
> At this stage, if there is a difference between the schema and the
> specification then it's my mistake.
>
> After the specification becomes approved, the specification becomes
> normative and the schema becomes secondary.
>
> The TC has to decide whether the "original" attribute is required or optional. I
> would think it should be optional, as not all XLIFF documents may have a
> source file.
>
> Regards,
> Rodolfo
> --
> Rodolfo M. Raya
> Maxprograms http://www.maxprograms.com
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [mailto:]
> > On Behalf Of Yves Savourel
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2012 2:05 PM
> > To:
> > Subject: [xliff] original attribute
> >
> > Hi Rodolfo, all,
> >
> > While working on the toolkit implementation I noticed that the 'original'
> > attribute of <file> is optional in the schema, but mandatory in specification.
> >
> > Which is it?
> >
> > Also, if were to have a problem like this after final publication
> > (which hopefully we won't), I would assume the specification would be
> > the definite word, right?
> >
> > Happy 4th July,
> > -yves
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > For additional commands, e-mail:
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:
>
