- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 01:30:47 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14709 --- Comment #16 from Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> 2011-11-08 01:30:45 UTC --- (In reply to comment #15) > > I don't understand what you mean by "semantically valid". Do you have an > > example of a language tag that is syntactically valid but not semantically > > valid? > > all off the following are valid syntactically (i.e., adhere to BCP47 language > tag syntax), however, 5 are semantically invalid (violate other, non-syntactic > constraints defined by BCP47) > > en valid - is in 639-1, and is shortest > eng invalid - is in 639-2, but violates shortest representation rule [...] > abcd invalid - is reserved for future use I would have defined <leif></leif> as invalid syntax, despite that it is has the shape of an HTML elemet. This seems in line with BCP47, seesection '2.2.9. Classes of Conformance' (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5646#section-2.2.9) which requires correct ABNF (section 2.1) in order to be "well-formed". But which in order to be "valid" requires correct use of the *registered* language tags. (What you say about "shortest" and "longest" only makes sense registration level - HTML5 should not care about those things.) -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 8 November 2011 01:30:49 UTC