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

(unknown charset) Re: {agenda} HTML WG telcon 2010-03-25: decision policy, issue status, updates from meetings, task force reports

From: (unknown charset) Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 14:54:43 +0100
To: (unknown charset) public-html-wg-announce@w3.org
Cc: (unknown charset) www-international@w3.org, HTMLwg WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20100325145443277463.ae5bb180@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Sam Ruby, Wed, 24 Mar 2010 12:21:21 -0400:

Regrets: It looks I am unable to be present during the call. 

>    d) ISSUE-88: content-language-multiple
>         No counter proposal received
>         http://www.w3.org/International/wiki/Htmlissue88

Comment: The agenda says 'no counter proposal received'. This is 
roughly correct, because my alternative proposal [1] isn't all that 
different from the I18N Wg's proposal. This is where they differ: 

a)     MY PROP says that the the issue of setting the default language 
via <meta> c-l should be solved by specifying that it is the *last* 
<meta> c-l element which counts in that respect, whereas the first 
<meta> c-l is the one to be used by servers/cms-es. This is compatible 
with current user agents. 

      I18N WG's PROP says that it is the first language tag inside the 
<meta> c-l that counts. No UAs implement this today.

      HTML5 says that it is the *first* <meta> that counts. The I18N 
Wg's proposal doesn't protest against this.

b)    MY PROP says that it should be permitted to just place whitespace 
inside the @content attribute of <meta> c-l, as this can solve some 
unfortunate language inheritance effects in current user agents. This 
is already permitted in HTML4/XHTML.

      I18N WG's PROP only says that @content should contain a comma 
separated list - and doesn't mention the whitespace option. (Actually, 
i18n wg's proposal, last I checked, talks about a space separated list 
instead of comma separated list. But this got to be an error ...!]

I support the I18N's wg's proposal over the the current spec. But would 
support it more wholeheartedly if my viewpoints on a) and especially on 
b) was incorporated into their proposal.

leif halvard silli
Received on Thursday, 25 March 2010 13:55:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:04:28 UTC