Re: [xliff] Assume elements without IDs cannot have FragIDs

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

Bryan, this is a correct assumption

Although we don't say so, it follows from the spec

We can add a note or warning at a later stage if we feel so because it changes nothing

there was discussion about this, I wanted modules to have fragids even w/o ids but we agreed that it would require a wildcard mechanism and discarded the idea all together.

Who wants fragids must use/add ids. BTW, this is also why we made group ids required.. 

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

http://www.cngl.ie/profile/?i=452

mailto: david.filip@ul.ie

On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 1:04 AM, Schnabel, Bryan S <bryan.s.schnabel@tektronix.com> wrote:

Looking at “3 Fragment Identification” I do not see an explicit statement that “elements without IDs cannot have FragIDs.”

 

For example the segment below has no ID:

 

<?xml version="1.0"?>

<xliff xmlns="urn:oasis:names:tc:xliff:document:2.0" version="2.0" srcLang="en" trgLang="fr">

<file id="f1">

  <unit id="1">

   <segment>

    <source>source</source>

    <target>target</target>

   </segment>

  </unit>

</file>

</xliff>

 

We imply this in 3.1 Selectors for Core Elements

 

“No prefix indicates an id for a <segment> or an <ignorable> or an inline element in the <source> element and the value of that id is unique within the enclosing <unit> element (with the exception of the matching inline elements in the <target>).”

 

No action requested. I think the spec is fine for now. I just wanted to see if my assumption is true.