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

Re: ISSUE-88 / Re: what's the language of a document ?

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 19:32:36 -0800
Cc: www-international@w3.org, HTMLwg WG <public-html@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Message-id: <F1636FDC-11E6-4788-8A11-9DCEF7AB24B3@apple.com>
To: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>

Richard, thoughts on this response? Do you think further changes are  
needed on any of these points?

(To my casual reading, it seems like point 3 was the most clearly  
rejected and is the most directly related to <http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8088 
 >, the bug that was originally filed, rejected and escalated,  
resulting in this tracker issue.)

Regards,
Maciej

On Feb 21, 2010, at 6:11 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:

> On Tue, 9 Feb 2010, Richard Ishida wrote:
>>
>> Are you ok to apply the points in
>> http://www.w3.org/International/wiki/Htmlissue88 to the spec?
>
>> From that document:
>
> | [1] Replace the term 'document-wide default language' with the term
> | 'Content-Language pragma language'.
>
> The spec currently uses the term "pragma-set default language".
>
>
> | [2] [...] clarify why the HTTP and pragma declarations are different
> | when it comes to values, and how they should be used
>
> The confusion is intended to be clarified by simply discouraging  
> authors
> from using the pragma at all.
>
> The proposed text:
>
> | Note: Declarations in the HTTP header and the Content Language  
> pragma
> | are metadata, referring to the document as a whole and expressing  
> the
> | expected language or languages of the audience of the document.
> | A language attribute on an element describes the actual language  
> used in
> | the range of content bounded by that element (and so values are  
> limited
> | to a single language at a time).
>
> ...seems to just muddy the waters further. Per HTTP, the Content- 
> Langauge
> HTTP header is supposed to say what languages the document is intended
> for, and doesn't say anything about the contents of the document. The
> pragma, on the other hand, just sets the default language of the  
> page. The
> pragra really has more in common with the attribute than the header,  
> in
> terms of actual practical effect.
>
> I'm certainly open to adding more disambiguating text, but I think it
> would be helpful to have some pointers to e-mails showing the  
> confusion so
> that a more directed disambiguation could be crafted.
>
>
> | [3] [allow the pragma to have more than one value, because] There is
> | consensus that the current syntax should not be changed, and that it
> | should be possible to continue to specify multiple languages in the
> | pragma.
>
> I disagree that there's consensus here. I don't understand the value  
> of
> allowing authors to specify values that are going to be ignored by
> processors.
>
>
> | [4] Remove 'primary' from:
> |
> | "The lang attribute (in no namespace) specifies the primary  
> language for
> | the element's contents and for any of the element's attributes that
> | contain text. Its value must be a valid BCP 47 language code, or the
> | empty string. [BCP47]"
> |
> | Rationale:
> |
> | Only one language can be declared at a time.
>
> Only one language can be _declared_ at a time, but that doesn't mean  
> only
> one language is actually contained in the element.
>
>
> | [5] [...] If the pragma attribute contains a comma-separated list of
> | languages, it cannot be determined with any degree of certainty  
> which of
> | the languages matches the content of the text.
>
> This was handled by changing the UA requirements of the pragma.
>
>
> I recommend going through the normal process for these, by the way  
> (using
> bugs and so forth) rather than jumping straight to the Change Proposal
> stage. It will help ensure that we keep issues focused.
>
> Cheers,
> -- 
> Ian Hickson               U+1047E                ) 
> \._.,--....,'``.    fL
> http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _ 
> \  ;`._ ,.
> Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'-- 
> (,_..'`-.;.'
>
Received on Monday, 22 February 2010 03:33:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 22 February 2010 03:33:11 GMT