[OASIS Issue Tracker] (XLIFF-10) sch reports missing tags even when <target> not present

[OASIS Issues Tracker <workgroup_mailer@lists.oasis-open.org>]

     [ https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/XLIFF-10?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

David Filip updated XLIFF-10:
-----------------------------

    Labels: ready-for-vote  (was: work_required)

> sch reports missing tags even when <target> not present
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: XLIFF-10
>                 URL: https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/XLIFF-10
>             Project: OASIS XML Localisation Interchange File Format (XLIFF) TC
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: validation artifacts
>    Affects Versions: 2.1_csprd01
>         Environment: http://markmail.org/thread/yrgx2oro3hf36br6
>            Reporter: David Filip
>            Assignee: Soroush Saadatfar
>              Labels: ready-for-vote
>             Fix For: 2.1_csprd02
>
>
> https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff-comment/201611/msg00000.html
> From: Ján Husarčík <jan.husarcik@gmail.com> 
>  xliff_core_2.1.sch: canDelete' attribute is set to 'no', but the corresponding element is missing in the sibling target.
> a file
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
> <xliff xmlns:mda="urn:oasis:names:tc:xliff:metadata:2.0" xmlns="urn:oasis:names:tc:xliff:document:2.0" srcLang="en-US" version="2.0" >
>     <file id="1">
>         <group id="content">
>             <unit id="1">
>                 <segment>
>                     <source>some <pc  id="p1"  canDelete="no">sentence</pc></source>
>                 </segment>
>             </unit>
>         </group>
>     </file>
> </xliff>
> passes XLIFF2.0 validation using Lynx.
> When validated using xliff_core_2.1.sch (https://tools.oasis-open.org/version-control/browse/wsvn/xliff/trunk/xliff-21/schemas/xliff_core_2.1.sch) an error "canDelete' attribute is set to 'no', but the corresponding element is missing in the sibling target." is reported.
> Maybe the rule should check whether sibling <target> is defined first



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2.2#6258)