- From: Olle Jarnefors <ojarnef@admin.kth.se>
- Date: Sun, 14 Apr 96 21:24:41 +0200
- To: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
- Cc: Harald.T.Alvestrand@uninett.no, ojarnef@admin.kth.se
Only some marginal comments. > A language tag identifies a natural language spoken, written, or > otherwise conveyed by human beings for communication of information to > | other human beings. Computer languages are explicitly excluded. HTTP I like this definition of the meaning of language tags. It's more general than that in RFC 1766 : The language tag always defines a language as spoken (or written) by : human beings for communication of information to other human beings. : Computer languages are explicitly excluded. and allows for sign languages for deaf people. > Whitespace is not allowed within the tag and all tags are > case-insensitive. The namespace of language tags is administered by > the IANA. Example tags include: > > en, en-US, en-cockney, i-cherokee, x-pig-latin > > where any two-letter primary-tag is an ISO 639 language abbreviation > and any two-letter initial subtag is an ISO 3166 country code. Please add a note to the effect that only "en" and "en-US" are legal language tags at the time of publication of the document, and that the other tags are included only to illustrate how language tags registered in the future may look. > It may be contrary to be privacy expectations of the user to send an > Accept-Language header with the complete linguistic preferences of the > user in every request. For a discussion of this issue, see Section > | 14.7. I suppose the second occurence of "be" on the first line should be removed. -- Olle Jarnefors, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) <ojarnef@admin.kth.se>
Received on Sunday, 14 April 1996 12:29:51 UTC