Den 01.06.2015 13:12, Andras Timar skreiv:
You are right. I thought that < and > perhaps is a valid code for
< and > as in HTML.
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Kolbjørn Stuestøl
It looks like the error function are reading < and > as XML tags.
The text "… new style of footnotes with <ref> and <references> tags that …"
is marked correctly as Invalid XML. (Unit #31209006). But they are not meant
to be XML tags. Here they are plain text.
Is it desirable to use < and > (or similar codes) instead of < and >
to avoid the error message?
IMHO it's easier to mark it as false positive in Pootle. There are
only a few of them in case of 'Invalid XML' check. Every string change
causes 100x work for 100x languages, not to mention engineer's time.
Of course, there are more important tasks than this one.
(Sent copy to list too)
To unsubscribe e-mail to: firstname.lastname@example.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/l10n/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
- Re: [libreoffice-l10n] New Pootle Critical errors (continued)
Impressum (Legal Info)
: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our trademark policy