On Monday, September 14, 2015 at 6:37:06 AM UTC-7, Axel Hecht wrote: > We're calling malformed an error/warning right now. Missing is an error, > obsolete is a warning. > > I'm not sure that's ultimately the right answer, in particular in the > light of locales which want to re-use en-US accesskeys. > > I'd like to make that easy. > > Doesn't make l10n-merge easier, though :-) > > I'm wondering, can we restrict ourselves in the model here to DOM nodes. > > In which case an obsolete attribute might actually be an error in the > sense that the l10n-merge code should remove it,
Sounds good to me. > while a missing attribute (or value) might be just a warning? I have more trouble with that. Missing attribute is not very different from missing a value and I'm concerned if we try to make it work. Example: A `placeholder` attribute of an entity is de-facto its value. Missing it should be an error and we should use fallback language entity then. Accesskeys are interesting, in that I can see how you might want to skip them in your partial locale and reuse the 'masters' one, but in that case, I'd expect some sort of metainformation stating "missing accesskeys are ok, reuse the parent locale ones" whitelist. zb. _______________________________________________ tools-l10n mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/tools-l10n
