Re: [xliff] Proposal for a <group> element

["Dr. David Filip" <David.Filip@ul.ie>]

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: david.filip@ul.ie

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 4:34 PM, Rodolfo M. Raya <rmraya@maxprograms.com> wrote:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:xliff@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf
> Of Yves Savourel
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 12:12 PM
> To: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org
> 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       rmraya@maxprograms.com
Maxprograms       http://www.maxprograms.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: xliff-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: xliff-help@lists.oasis-open.org