Viewing a history listing
|12:43, 2 September 2016||Nemo bis||(-purodha)|
|16:36, 18 June 2016||Nemo bis||(not twn issue)|
|16:35, 18 June 2016||Nemo bis|
|11:03, 17 March 2016||Purodha||(Reply to xml tags in ksh translation)|
|09:27, 17 March 2016||Lokal Profil||(Reply to xml tags in ksh translation)|
|15:02, 7 March 2016||Purodha|
|15:00, 7 March 2016||Purodha||(Reply to xml tags in ksh translation)|
|14:12, 7 March 2016||Lokal Profil||(opening again (since it wasn't limited to this message))|
|14:12, 7 March 2016||Lokal Profil||(Reply to xml tags in ksh translation)|
|15:44, 6 March 2016||Purodha||(Reply to xml tags in ksh translation)|
|15:43, 6 March 2016||Purodha|
|08:37, 4 March 2016||Liuxinyu970226|
|15:57, 3 March 2016||Lokal Profil|
I just came across the Ripoarisch (ksh) translations of the DCAT-AP messages and noticed that these contain what looks like mangled xml tags.
Could anyone who speaks the language take a look?
So, it is HMTL, and not related to XML.
A problem here might be that the message has been reused with another parameter set, where each parameter itself is one of a choice of messages that should now have the markup, but the message documentation was only partially updated. I am going to check that and make sure, it only occurs once, once the message documentation has been updated so that I can know which messages are inserted as $1 and $2, respectively.
Sorry, yes it is html (I spotted the
xml:lang tag and didn't look closer).
Both your link makes clear that: a) That sort of mark-up is a suggested guideline and may not be fully supported. b) That it only applies to MediaWiki.
In the current case adding such mark-up will simply write it out explicitly (since anything else would be unsafe in the xml document where it is used).
The message was updated to support a second parameter (instead of assuming this was gzip). The first parameter is the same as before. The documentation was updated at the same time but I've now also added examples to make things clearer.