Skip to content

Missing attribute 'original' #4594

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

Marcelsj
Copy link
Contributor

@Marcelsj Marcelsj commented Dec 5, 2014

I copy pasted the example messages.en.xliff provided. Running it on symfony 2.6 required me the attribute 'original'.
I added ' original="file.ext" ' as attribute for the file tag and it worked. However I am not shure about the proper parameter for this attribute.

I copy pasted the example messages.en.xliff provided. Running it on symfony 2.6 required me the attribute 'original'.
I added ' original="file.ext" ' as attribute for the file tag and it worked. However I am not shure about the proper parameter for this attribute.
wouterj added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 6, 2014
This PR was submitted for the 2.6 branch but it was merged into the 2.3 branch instead (closes #4594).

Discussion
----------

Missing attribute 'original'

I copy pasted the example messages.en.xliff provided. Running it on symfony 2.6 required me the attribute 'original'.
I added ' original="file.ext" ' as attribute for the file tag and it worked. However I am not shure about the proper parameter for this attribute.

Commits
-------

c0ef3e4 Missing attribute 'original'
@wouterj
Copy link
Member

wouterj commented Dec 6, 2014

Thanks for the fix, marcel!

Yeah, we can't have a nice argument for this version due to the translation usage of Symfony: translations don't usually belong to a specific file, but just to the complete application.

I've merged it into the 2.3 branch instead of 2.6, as 2.3 is the oldest (still maintained) version of the documentation.

Isn't this yet another reason to not promote Xliff usage as the first choice, @fabpot @javiereguiluz @weaverryan?

@wouterj wouterj closed this Dec 6, 2014
@weaverryan
Copy link
Member

@wouterj I think you should open an issue about it on the docs with the pros and cons as you see them. Then we can properly talk about it and what a full workflow would be for handling translations - from creating keys, extracting and translating - which is something I also think is missing

Thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants