MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
xliff message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Re: Expert opinion on <context-group> uniqueness
Sorry Yves, I have not used context-group so far.
Are you thinking of someone else in the group?
I have been looking at the spec and I think there is an ambiguity in the
definition.
According to the spec, each context group must be uniquely named in the
file.
It then describes how a default context group can be defined at a high level
in the hierarchy which is implicitly inherited at all child levels, but does
not explain how the overrides behave
For individual sub elements , default group can be overridden at lower
levels.
But for this to work, the override group MUST have the same name as the
default group, or how will the parser realise that the groups are identical?
Therefore,
1) Multiple context groups with the same name MAY exist but only in
different levels of the hierarchy
2) Defaults and overrides MUST have the same name - matching context names
are used to define parent child relationships
At least that's what I think.
I have not CCed Asgeir, as others in the group may not agree with this
definition.
If consensus in the group, please forward to Asgeir.
If there is a real ambiguity, do we simply need an explicit example of using
default /override, or do we need to modify the spec again?
Mat