W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-multilingualweb-lt-comments@w3.org > March 2013

Re: "Saying that something is not in a locale" with BCP 47

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2013 19:05:13 +0100
Message-ID: <5134E259.5060109@w3.org>
To: "Phillips, Addison" <addison@lab126.com>
CC: www-international <www-international@w3.org>, "public-multilingualweb-lt-comments@w3.org" <public-multilingualweb-lt-comments@w3.org>
Hi Addison,

thanks for the feedback - we had something like this in a previous ITS2 
draft, see the localeFilterType attribute at
http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20120731/#EX-locale-filter-selector-1
the only difference to what you propose is that localeFilterType is a 
separate attribute in addition to a main "list" attribute, whereas you 
have two attributes.

Best,

Felix

Am 04.03.13 18:48, schrieb Phillips, Addison:
> Hi Felix,
>
> Language tags (and language ranges) are mostly about selection, so there is no built-in means of doing what you're looking for. I don't think adding such a subtag would be a good idea either (where would you put it where it wouldn't be disturbed by a fallback mechanism? What happens if your value is a language priority list?).
>
> I think a better means of doing this is having a separate attribute that is like "its-locale-filter-list", only as an exclusion list ("its-locale-exclusion-list"). Then it is easy to write:
>
> <p its-locale-filter-list="*-CA">Legal notice for Canada</p>
> <p its-locale-exclusion-list="*-CA">Legal notice for all other countries</p>
>
> Addison
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org]
>> Sent: Monday, March 04, 2013 9:40 AM
>> To: www-international
>> Cc: public-multilingualweb-lt-comments@w3.org
>> Subject: "Saying that something is not in a locale" with BCP 47
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> at
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>> lt/2013Feb/0318.html
>> the MLW-LT WG is discussing a use case of expressing that something is not in
>> a locale. One way to do this is to add a flag to a BCP 47 value, see above cited
>> mail. Another way could be to have in a markup environment an additional
>> attribute expressing the "include" vs "exclude" options for the BCP 47 value.
>>
>> Thoughts? This is probably an additional piece of information rather than part
>> of a BCP47 value itself. Has such a use case been discussed for BCP47 values?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Felix
>>
>> (this is action-454 for the MLW-LT WG)
Received on Monday, 4 March 2013 18:05:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 4 March 2013 18:05:43 GMT