- From: John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
- Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 14:03:53 -0500 (EST)
- To: Misha.Wolf@reuters.com
- Cc: jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com (Jeremy Carroll), w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Misha.Wolf@reuters.com scripsit: > I haven't seen Pat's examples, but want to stress that locale and > language are very different concepts and that xml:lang is defined for > language, not for locale. I agree with this principle completely, but ... > It is perfectly OK for someone in France to > write in English and for someone in the UK to write in French. This > does not magically interchange the meanings of instances of "1,234" and > "1.234" found within their documents. .. this doesn't seem like a good example. 1,234 embedded in German text is going to be between 1 and 2, no matter where it was written; 1,234 embedded in us-en text is going to mean between 1000 and 2000, no matter where it was written. A better example is sorting: one may wish en_US rules for sorting even if the strings being sorted are in a variety of languages and marked as such. -- John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com> http://www.reutershealth.com I amar prestar aen, han mathon ne nen, http://www.ccil.org/~cowan han mathon ne chae, a han noston ne 'wilith. --Galadriel, _LOTR:FOTR_
Received on Thursday, 7 March 2002 14:08:28 UTC