Re: RE: [xliff] more comments on the XLIFF DTD

[dcpleland@ftnetwork.com]

Hi Eric;

Ah yes, now that I know the problem is recurrent, I can see it all in the 'reveal source' of my browser, like this:

**************
Then, in the interest of simplification, let's not have it present on

 and

at all and require it to be present at the
level.

Eric
************** Thanks for the response, David L ************************************************************ eric@eTranslate.com wrote on 1/28/02 5:16:28 PM ************************************************************ David, I think your mail client may be broken. I'm writing in text/plain and you are having trouble viewing characters that are significant in HTML. See http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/200201/msg00013.html for the mail I sent earlier: the archive copy correclty displays words you reported as missing. I suspect that the same problem is at work in the trouble you had with Christian's mail. Eric -----Original Message----- From: dcpleland@ftnetwork.com [mailto:dcpleland@ftnetwork.com] Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 9:02 AM To: christian.lieske@sap.com Cc: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [xliff] more comments on the XLIFF DTD Hi Christian; The dtd comments at the end of your email appeared blank in the email that I received. Have you resent them? Regards, David L ************************************************************ christian.lieske@sap.com wrote on 1/25/02 1:41:18 PM ************************************************************ Hi All, Encouraged by the positive replies which David Leland received for his comments on the DTD (and the feeling that questions about the specification and DTD are welcome at this very early state of the TC's work), I dare to send out some comments of my own which I recently jotted down. I am aware of the risk, that some active members of the dataDefinition group may be somewhat bored (you know groans and "oh, not that again!") because they already might have spent several hours on the topics to which my comments pertain. However, I see the chance that explanations at the very start might be beneficial to the overall process. The specification will have to go through the approval process and presumably will be exposed to those same type of questions anyway, so we might as well address them now. For your convenience, I communicate my comments 1. interspersed in the DTD (see attachment) 2. as integral part of this mail (extracted from the DTD; see bottom of the mail; digits at the beginning of the lines are line numbers) and classify each comment as belonging to one of three categories R: remark that may not need to be addressed in the current specification but could be used for later work Q: question related to explanantions in the specification/DTD that were unclear to me I: idea that may not need to be addressed in the current specification but could be used for later work Best regards, Christian ----------------------------------------------------- Christian Lieske Christian.Lieske@sap.com SAP AG - MultiLingual Technology www.sap.com ----------------------------------------------------- 24: 41: 45: 47: 48: 50: 52: 54: 55: 58: 60: 62: 70: 74: 77: 85: 88: 95: 137: 138: 164: 167: 175: 178: 208: 209: 217: 218: 241: 245: 273: ---------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription manager: ____________________________________________________________________________ _______________________ Get your free e-mail account at http://www.ftnetwork.com Visit the web site of the Financial Times at http://www.ft.com ---------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription manager:


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Get your free e-mail account at http://www.ftnetwork.com
Visit the web site of the Financial Times at http://www.ft.com