Start a new topic

Some more HTML tag trouble

Again, the source file is a mqxliff file with single HTML tags, generated from an excel file.

The source text contains „<u>“. When coyping source to target (source is looking correct), this is what the target segment looks like:

image

The string <u> is being converted into a CT tag.

This is a little bit irrititating, especially as deleting the red u only works temporary. After confirming and getting back they are there again. In the grid this phrase is underlined (but it should not).

The interesting thing is that the export worked correctly, int he mqxliff file there is the <u> tag again. The same will happen with the <b> tag, I suppose (in this example file the tag <strong> was used instead).

If you are prepared that this may happen, okay, but a no go for any beginner. The <u> tag was deprecated with HTML 4.0, but if I understand correctly, it it used again in HTML 5 (and by CafeTran, as we see).

Some months ago I complained about a similar problem, and the general behaviour with tags was different and better this time. After typing <strong> or <br />, these strings are recognized as such and cannot be corrected any more (and deleted only as a whole).

This is a little bit irrititating


It makes me wonder why because:


1. CT tags representation is more concise.

2. It is easier and faster to handle (typing, inserting via the shortcuts).

3. It converts to mqxliff html tags just file.

I assume I did not explain it well enough, and the source view was missing above.

Let us take the following example (word file).

image

This looks after import into CT like this in the grid.

 

image


This is acceptable, though there may be situations where the interpretation of tags might be inappropiate or unwanted.


But when opening the source and target editor, the following happens after copying source to target:


image



image


image


Shouldn't then the red b, i and u tags also be in the source segment, to produce a kind of consistency? In this case I would agree to Igor (though this behaviour has to be explained clearly to any beginner).


And an extension for some more really common HTML tags (strong, br, p, etc.) would then be welcome.


Addendum: Concerning consistency, at the first and perhaps even at a second look you get the impression that there are too many tags in the target segment.

 

Yes, I agree that source/target display of html tags is a consistency issue to be addressed.

Login to post a comment