W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > September 2002

RE: Erratum to XML 1.0 spec to allow xml:lang=""

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 11:43:22 +0200
To: "Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "RDF Core" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BHEGLCKMOHGLGNOKPGHDGEDICAAA.jjc@hpl.hp.com>


In the abstract syntax I could specify that either lang is oblig and
defaults to "" or that lang="" is illegal. Probably the former is most in
tune with XML. DaveB might then need some wordsmithing.

Jeremy

> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-rdfcore-wg-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-rdfcore-wg-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Brian McBride
> Sent: 19 September 2002 10:21
> To: RDF Core
> Subject: Fwd: Erratum to XML 1.0 spec to allow xml:lang=""
>
>
>
> Affects rdf/xml syntax?
>
> Brian
>
> >Resent-Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 15:31:03 -0400 (EDT)
> >X-Sender: pgrosso@172.27.10.30
> >X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2
> >Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 14:24:23 -0500
> >To: chairs@w3.org, <w3c-xml-plenary@w3.org>
> >From: Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>
> >Cc: w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org
> >X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on LORAX/DTW/ATI(Release 5.0.8 |June
> >18, 2001) at 09/18/2002
> >  03:32:29 PM,
> >         Serialize by Router on LORAX/DTW/ATI(Release 5.0.8 |June 18,
> > 2001) at 09/18/2002
> >  03:32:30 PM,
> >         Serialize complete at 09/18/2002 03:32:30 PM
> >Subject: Erratum to XML 1.0 spec to allow xml:lang=""
> >Resent-From: chairs@w3.org
> >X-Mailing-List: <chairs@w3.org> archive/latest/2129
> >X-Loop: chairs@w3.org
> >Sender: chairs-request@w3.org
> >Resent-Sender: chairs-request@w3.org
> >List-Id: <chairs.w3.org>
> >List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
> >List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:chairs-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
> >
> >
> >As previously mentioned [1], [2], at the request of the I18N WG [3],
> >the XML Core WG has been considering whether the explicit licensing
> >of the use of xml:lang="" to "un-declare" a language should be made
> >an erratum to XML 1.0 or merely included as part of XML 1.1.
> >
> >The XML Core WG has debated this issue thoroughly, seeked the
> >input of various groups (including chairs, XML Plenary, and
> >various public email groups), and canvased current implementations.
> >
> >It has been decided that the optimal situation is to issue this as an
> >erratum to the XML 1.0 spec.  Hence, you can see this reflected in the
> >current Errata document at http://www.w3.org/XML/xml-V10-2e-errata#E41 .
> >
> >The XML Core WG thanks all who provided feedback in this decision.
> >
> >Paul Grosso, co-chair, XML Core WG
> >
> >[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-plenary/2002Aug/0000
> >[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-plenary/2002Aug/0026
> >[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-core-wg/2002AprJun/0161
>
>
Received on Thursday, 19 September 2002 05:43:27 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:51:00 EDT