W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-editor@w3.org > July to September 2002

Re: XML Core WG needs input on xml:lang=""

From: Tex Texin <tex@i18nguy.com>
Date: Sun, 04 Aug 2002 15:15:44 -0400
Message-ID: <3D4D7D60.D0B5C11A@i18nGuy.com>
To: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
CC: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@topologi.com>, w3c-xml-plenary@w3.org, w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org, xml-editor@w3.org, w3c-xml-core-wg@w3.org, John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>

Should this change be an erratum to XML 1.0, or part of XML 1.1?

Can someone clarify for me:
I am under the impression that using xml:lang="" today would be invalid
XML.
Therefore the document containing it should be rejected, no?

Changing a parser to support the empty value is (probably) not like
adding another value to a table (as was suggested in the thread
somewhere I believe).
I would guess a parser that checks for this error would have code
checking for an empty string and the code would need to be amended.
So, making this an erratum is not like updating a table.

I would agree that supporting it sooner is a good thing, but it seems
this creates an atmosphere of not knowing whether to use
xml:lang="" since some parsers would reject it and others accept it,
depending on whether the parsers code has been updated. Keying it to a
version would make it reliable.

I do recognize it is a very small code change.

What am I missing, that would make this erratum something that could be
depended on in a reasonable time frame?




-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------
Tex Texin   cell: +1 781 789 1898   mailto:Tex@XenCraft.com
Xen Master                          http://www.i18nGuy.com
                         
XenCraft		            http://www.XenCraft.com
Making e-Business Work Around the World
-------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Sunday, 4 August 2002 15:15:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:32 GMT