W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > April to June 2007

Re: For review: Tagging text with no language

From: CE Whitehead <cewcathar@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2007 10:46:23 -0400
Message-ID: <BAY114-F9BA0DEACFBD72A23F8400B3310@phx.gbl>
To: www-international@w3.org


>
>
>Hello Richard, Najib,
>
>At 07:25 07/05/19, Najib Tounsi wrote:
> >
> >Hi Richard,
> >
> >My feedback is perhaps subjective. My feeling is that, in some places, 
>the text is not sufficently clear for those who don't speak English 
>fluently.
> >
> >Anyway, here are some remarks (about 
>http://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-no-language#undetermined)
> >
> >- You write
> >"For example, xml:lang="" might be used if text is included into a 
>document from a database that doesn't provide language information..."
> >It is the text or the document which is from a database? The text of 
>course.
> >Should I understand this:
> >For example, xml:lang="" might be used if text is to be included into a 
>document and (the text) comes from a database that doesn't provide language 
>information ...?
>
>Very good point.


The above seems to be a good rewrite, but I do speak English so we should 
wait for someone else to see what people whose English is not quite as good  
think.

> >-You write
> >"The effect would be to cancel any language information declared higher 
>up the hierarchy of elements in the document."
> >What do "cancel any language" means?
> > - remove the language information declared higher up the hierarchy? 
>Wrong
> > - override this declaration by the new one "und"? Right
> >
> >Finally the whole story (about the use of "und") is, if you can "leave 
>out the markup", go ahead. Mark up only if "you have a particular need to 
>indicate that the language is undefined". Right?
>
>I was also a bit surprised by this. It's easy to read this as
>"language tagging, so who cares?". It looks like it's quite in
>contrast to what we say on language tags otherwise.
>

Actually this issue of not using und normally did make me stumble the first 
time I read it too; normally we say always tag.    It in fact 'overrides' or 
'cancels out' the very first sentence of the answer to the "How do I mark up 
. . . content" question at the top.  Here's that sentence again:

"You should always use attributes to identify the human language of the text 
on the highest possible element of documents in HTML or a format based on 
XML, so that applications such as voice browsers, style sheets, and the like 
can process that text."

I see now Najib's comments were pretty good--
So maybe

only using und when necessary

does need a comment in the draft;
but I do think that the draft is a helpful and well-organized answer to the 
question about how to mark up content.


--C. E. Whitehead
cewcathar@hotmail.com


>Regards,    Martin.
>
>
>
>#-#-#  Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University

>
>
--C. E. Whitehead
cewcathar@hotmail.com

_________________________________________________________________
Like the way Microsoft Office Outlook works? You’ll love Windows Live 
Hotmail. 
http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_mini_outlook_0507
Received on Sunday, 20 May 2007 06:45:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 19:17:13 GMT