- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 12:40:37 +1000
- To: Noah Slater <nslater@tumbolia.org>
- Cc: "Julian F. F. Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, ietf@ietf.org, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Strike that; looking more closely, RFC4646 makes sense ATM (although LTRU will change that). On 24/07/2009, at 11:02 AM, Mark Nottingham wrote: > Hi Noah, > > Sorry, that slipped through the cracks. > > lang doesn't make any sense in this context; in HTML it applies to > the link text, but there is none here. > > Regarding hreflang - looking through the history, it's been > discussed in a fairly positive light a few times, but never made it > in. I think it does make some sense, since it's both in Atom and > HTML. I'm a bit concerned about what the appropriate reference is > for the value space; ATM I'm thinking BCP47 directly, rather than to > a specific RFC, to allow it to evolve*. > > Anyone see an issue with adding hreflang with a value space of BCP47? > > Cheers, > > * Often, a reference to an RFC is preferable, so that software can > be reliably written to a specific set of identifiers. My initial > feeling is that here that's not appropriate to do that, because > language tags are labels, not something that you're going to > hardcode into infrastructure software. Feedback appreciated, > especially from the i18n community. > > > > On 24/07/2009, at 7:08 AM, Noah Slater wrote: > >> Hey Mark, >> >> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 02:32:18PM +1000, Mark Nottingham wrote: >>> I'm tracking proposed changes to -06 as a result of Last Call at: >>> http://www.mnot.net/drafts/draft-nottingham-http-link-header-07.txt >> >> I'm not sure how this process works, so please just say so if I'm >> getting the >> wrong end of the stick. I've sent a number of emails to the list >> about adding >> two language related link parameters. >> >> My original email was: >> >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2009AprJun/0196.html >> >> My next email was: >> >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2009JulSep/0100.html >> >> And I added some clarification here: >> >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2009JulSep/0112.html >> >> I'm worried that your most recent email means that my suggestions >> wont make it >> into the specification. If that's the case, I was hoping for some >> comentary so >> that I understand why that isn't going to be possible. >> >> Thanks, >> >> -- >> Noah Slater, http://tumbolia.org/nslater > > > -- > Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Friday, 24 July 2009 02:41:24 UTC