W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > January to March 2010

RE: what's the language of a document ?

From: CE Whitehead <cewcathar@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2010 17:48:29 -0500
Message-ID: <BLU109-W26339D40BCAB9C471F27D4B3530@phx.gbl>
To: <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, <ian@hixie.ch>
CC: <www-international@w3.org>, <public-html@w3.org>


Hi.
 

 



From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>

Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 19:55:45 +0000 (UTC)





>> [4] Establish the rule that multiple values in the place that has 

>> precedence equates to lang="".

>Done

 



I assume that this rule is only for interpreting the language of lower level elements with no language declared--right or no? 

(See: http://www.w3.org/International/wiki/Htmlissue88 for where I get this idea )





 

 

> Content-Language is indeed unnecessary given lang="", but I would 

> recommend bringing this up with the HTTP group if the proposal is to 

> remove the header altogether.



 

Hmm; going back to Tex Texin's email from Oct 9:



 

"From: Tex Texin <textexin@xencraft.com> 

Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 18:05:54 -0700





> Re: [3] Establish the precedence between http vs meta. 



> I wish we could eliminate this nonsense altogether.

> The description of the content of a document should be self-contained within

> the document and not in the protocol.

> The protocol should only ever reflect what is in the document to enable

> routing and filters etc.

> But documents should be self-declared."



 

I agree that the protocol is for routing and filters but I am not sure what Tex is saying here;

isn't this header needed so that if I request www.google.ca or www.msn.com and my language preference is set to French, then my page will be served in French?  (Maybe there is something I don't understand and maybe it's not needed here.)





 

In any case, if you remove these headers, how do you plan to handle documents with multiple target languages?

(for example, a page with Old French or Middle or other French texts with summaries or discussions of each in English--

in this case the target audience is someone who simultaneously reads Old or Middle French and modern English;

other documents are in two languages on a single page and targeting speakers from both--

for example, the many pages with the translation into a second language placed side-by-side the original

on the same page; and there may be some legal documents with texts in one language and dicussions in another)

 

Finally,

 

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> 

Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2010 12:39:47 +1100


> Subject: Re: what's the language of a document ?
> 
> On Sat, Feb 6, 2010 at 6:55 AM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 31 Oct 2009, Tex Texin wrote:
> >>
> >> Re: [3] Establish the precedence between http vs meta.
> >>
> >> I wish we could eliminate this nonsense altogether.
> >> The description of the content of a document should be self-contained within
> >> the document and not in the protocol.
> >> The protocol should only ever reflect what is in the document to enable
> >> routing and filters etc.
> >> But documents should be self-declared.
> >
> > Content-Language is indeed unnecessary given lang="", but I would
> > recommend bringing this up with the HTTP group if the proposal is to
> > remove the header altogether.
> 
> This would work for several types of resources, e.g. html resources
> and xml-based resources.
> 
> But there are many more mime types that get served over http which do
> not declare their language inside the document and where an external
> hint like this to the receiver will be helpful. I wouldn't act this
> hastily with removing a HTTP header.
> 
> Regards,
> Silvia.
> 
I agree with Sylvia.

 

Best,

 

C. E. Whitehead

cewcathar@hotmail.com 
 		 	   		  
Received on Saturday, 6 February 2010 22:49:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 6 February 2010 22:49:11 GMT