W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-core@w3.org > January to March 2006

Re: [CDR Framework] i18n comment: Language identification for child documents

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 12:06:51 +0900
To: "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>
Cc: public-cdf@w3.org, public-i18n-core@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.s39xlpe6x1753t@ibm-60d333fc0ec.mag.keio.ac.jp>

Hello Mark,

thanks for your reply.

On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 10:04:21 +0900, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org> wrote:

>
> Hello Felix, thanks for your comments.
>
> On 1/25/06, fsasaki@w3.org <fsasaki@w3.org> wrote:
>>
>> Comment from the i18n review of:
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-CDR-20051219/
>>
>> Comment 5
>> At http://www.w3.org/International/reviews/0601-cdf/
>> Editorial/substantive: S
>> Location in reviewed document:
>>  general
>>
>> Comment:
>>
>> If you ask an SVG document about language information, and the document  
>> is inside an HTML document, the xml:lang attribute in the HTML applies  
>> to the SVG as well. It seems that the compounding specs should say:  
>> \"You should get the same results for both inclusion and referencel.\"
>
> The WG has just discussed this, and we feel that for the CDR case -
> which is all the current set of Last Call drafts cover - the value of
> the xml:lang attribute in any containing HTML should *not* apply to
> children, because it isn't authoritative (as described in the TAG's
> finding on authoritative metadata[1]) as a result of requiring
> multiple messages to assemble the compound document.  Consider, for
> example, that the child document might be returned with an HTTP
> message which includes a Content-Language header (sec 14.12 of RFC
> 2616) with a (authoritative) value inconsistent with that specified by
> the xml:lang attribute.  More generally too, content may be retrieved
> from multiple domains over which the author of the containing document
> has no control, and therefore propagating the value of attributes like
> xml:lang doesn't seem appropriate.
>
>  [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/mime-respect.html
>
> Thanks.
>
> Mark.
>

The i18n core working group still disagrees with your reply.
We have a scenario in mind with an XHTML document which contains an SVG  
image. If it is external, the language information does not apply anymore.  
Our concern is: what should happen if there is no "authoritative  
metadata"? We agree with the explanation you gave us, but would like to  
have a scenario for the case without "authoritative metadata", but with  
document internal data.

Regards, Felix.
Received on Wednesday, 1 February 2006 03:07:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 1 October 2008 10:18:50 GMT