- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 21:03:18 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, Chris Wendt <Chris.Wendt@microsoft.com>
On Thu, 31 Jul 2008, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > >How about a new keyword for "lang", instead, which means "not > >translatable" or some such? lang="computer-code" or something. > > That could be done, although in some of the scenarios (like trademarks > or industry terms, or addresses), I'm not sure if the original language > is still actually interesting (since you'd have to replace it with the > "untranslatable" one. The logic is really a bit, somehow, on lang. Yeah... maybe the syntax of lang="" should be extended, with a prefix or suffix keyword that means "this is not translatable, but is based on this language"? e.g. lang="en-US" vs lang="only en-US"? This has the added advantage of automatically disabling translation on any system that already supports lang="" properly. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 31 July 2008 21:03:57 UTC