W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2012

Re: [css3-text] Better wording than "known to be language X" (was line-break questions/comments

From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 08:58:58 +0800
Message-ID: <CACQ=j+cEJYkc-B4=UHrBTYckAa8cNfKi21dxza_CFKnh=7x2PA@mail.gmail.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 8:54 AM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>wrote:

> On 08/27/2012 05:13 PM, Glenn Adams wrote:
>
>>
>> The current language is unacceptable and misleading without further
>> clarification, as it implies textual/linguistic analysis.
>> If the following informative text were added in a new Section 1.4
>> "Conventions", then I would be satisfied:
>>
>> <quote>
>> A phrase of the form "known to be X" where X is a language name, e.g.,
>> "known to be Japanese", is intended to be determined
>> using markup alone, and does not imply a requirement to perform
>> linguistic analysis (i.e., language recognition) of associated
>> text content."
>> </quote>
>>
>
> The spec says
>   # The content language of an element is the (human) language the element
> is
>   # declared to be in, according to the rules of the document language.
>                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^**^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> The rules for determining the content language are deferred, in their
> entirety,
> to the document language. I don't think that saying anything about how
> those
> rules are formulated is within scope.


I agree, and that is not what I am asking for here. I'm really asking for
something very simple: connect the dots from "known to be X language" to
"content language" [and its deferred rules]. Surely you and Koji are
capable of solving this minor editorial problem?!
Received on Tuesday, 28 August 2012 00:59:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:58 GMT