[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [xliff] Question on XLIFF editors
Hi David, The XML standard (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xml-20040204/) specifies that both single and double quote are valid attribute delimiters and have to be supported. Both exist in order to allow the escaping of the other with in an attribute. The question is therefore not specific to XLIFF but to XML in general. According to the XML standard you have to support both, and neither can be assumed in advance from an XML compliant processor. In a similar manner the order of attributes in an element can never be assumed or guaranteed. If you are using a parser such as Xerces it will transparently return the attribute values to you without any need to concern yourself about which delimiter has been used. Best Regards, AZ David Pooley wrote: > Hi all, > > First of all, please accept my apologies for my absence at yesterday's > meeting. I had an unexpected last minute visit to another office and was > unable to make it back in time due to adverse (to say the least!) > weather conditions. > > I just wanted to post a question to the group to get some feedback. We > are currently using the Xerces parser to process XLIFF documents but it > doesn't provide us with any feedback as how attributes have been > encoded. As such, what comes in as single-quoted attributes (e.g. <g > id='1'>) may end up as being double-quoted when we write it back out (<g > id="1">). My feeling on the matter is that since both are valid XML and > represent exactly the same thing, it really shouldn't matter if this > happens. However, I'm concerned that someone out there might be using an > XLIFF parser which requires one method or the other and that it will > break if the quotation paradigm is changed. > > Is there anything in the specification or anywhere else that says that > an XLIFF editor shouldn't change this setting? I'd like to think that > since an XLIFF document can go through numerous editors that valid XML > should be the only pre-requisite but I was wondering what other > developers thought of this. > > Thanks for any feedback. > > Regards > > *David Pooley* > Software Architect > SDL International > > > -- email - email@example.com smail - c/o Mr. A.Zydron PO Box 2167 Gerrards Cross Bucks SL9 8XF United Kingdom Mobile +(44) 7966 477 181 FAX +(44) 1753 480 465 www - http://www.xml-intl.com This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you may not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy version. Unless explicitly stated otherwise this message is provided for informational purposes only and should not be construed as a solicitation or offer.