⚠️ Warning: This is a draft ⚠️
This means it might contain formatting issues, incorrect code, conceptual problems, or other severe issues.
If you want to help to improve and eventually enable this page, please fork RosettaGit's repository and open a merge request on GitHub.
== Which Equivalence? == When we produce XML, what degree of equivalence to the sample is required? According to which normalization rules should the equivalence be performed?
I ask because none of the language samples that describe what output they actually produce generate the exact text in the task description. —[[User:Dkf|Dkf]] 08:19, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
== Attributes == Shouldn't the task be extended such that the document contains at least one attribute? -- [[User:Wmeyer|Wmeyer]] 00:39, 13 January 2010 (UTC) :Yes in principle, but it's a big round of breaking of existing examples to do. Is it that important? –[[User:Dkf|Donal Fellows]] 10:32, 13 January 2010 (UTC) :: For scenarios like that, it makes more sense to create the "extended" version as a new task, deprecate this one, and forward-port as many examples as possible. (Do we have a deprecated task category? We're likely going to need one. ISTR creating a dep task template.) --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 20:03, 13 January 2010 (UTC) ::I'm now convinced that it is probably not important enough to break examples or create a new task. Especially since [[XML Creation]] is a similar task that already deals with attributes. -- [[User:Wmeyer|Wmeyer]] 20:17, 13 January 2010 (UTC)