El dv 05 de 07 de 2013 a les 11:19 +0200, en/na Kevin Brubeck Unhammer va escriure: > Tino Didriksen <[email protected]> > writes: > > > On 04-07-2013 11:41, Dávid Nemeskey wrote: > > > > The words set and list are used interchangeably in CG. This is in > > contrast to how these term are used in CS, and partly to the > > commonsensical meanings of the words as well. The current planning > > process might be just the right time to fix this issue. I propose > > to say good-bye to list. > > > > I agree - you only need SET. I would love to remove LIST from CG-3, > > but that is simply not possible in the current plain text format. In > > XML, it's trivial. > > > > <tag>nom</tag> vs <tag n="nom"/> > > > > While <tag>nom</tag> is the most correct as per XML, the most readable > > is <tag n="nom"/> and shorter. Alternatively, <t>nom</t> or <t > > n="nom"/> since the fact that it's a tag is clear from context and > > DTD. > > Just don't make n an id (or stick with <t>nom</t>). In dix files, sdefs > are XML id's; I wish they weren't, since for some reason XML id's are > terribly limited in what characters they can contain, e.g. neither @, →, > ←, $, nor &entity; are allowed (CG tags need to be able to have @ or → > in them). >
The nice thing about having IDs though is the validation. Is there another thing that can be an id for validation purposes, but allow @ → etc. ? F. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: Build for Windows Store. http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Apertium-stuff mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff
