I agree that prescribing the number of groups can be risky. I think there could be an acceptable workflow where groups and elements within groups could be added or deleted. Enforcing a minimum number would impede this workflow.
Also, for attributes, I would add the fs (format-style) attribute.
Thanks,
Bryan
From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of Dr. David Filip
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 8:57 AM
To: Rodolfo M. Raya
Cc: Yves Savourel;
Subject: Re: [xliff] Proposal for a <group> element
Dear Rodolfo, although I tend to philosophically agree that a singleton does not constitute a group, I think that we cannot prevent authors of source content from creating hierarchies containing just one element at some levels.
IMHO, enforcing 2 child elements for group could be potentially harmful for intuitive representations.
This leads me to the idea that we could also consider empty groups, just a thought, not sure about this one..
Cheers
dF
Dr. David Filip
=======================
LRC | CNGL | LT-Web | CSIS
University of Limerick, Ireland
telephone: +353-6120-2781
cellphone: +353-86-0222-158
facsimile: +353-6120-2734
mailto:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 4:34 PM, Rodolfo M. Raya <> wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [mailto:] On Behalf
> Of Yves Savourel
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 12:12 PM
> To:
> Subject: [xliff] Proposal for a <group> element
Hi Yves,
> group
>
> Grouping element.
>
> Contains:
>
> - One or more <unit> or <group> elements in any order followed by
The new <group> element should contain 2 or more <unit> or <group> elements. If a <group> contains just one of those element, it is not "grouping" anything.
Regards,
Rodolfo
--
Rodolfo M. Raya
Maxprograms http://www.maxprograms.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:
