- From: gsergiu via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 09:17:42 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
@r12a well the whole processingLanguage was introduced to be used by text processors as I remember. However that topic is addressed in #341 With regard to processing language, I don't expect that the processignLanguage will be more precise than the (dc:)language property. In the language-processingLanguage relationship, the first one is the "master", and the second one was added only to reduce the cardinality. Therefore the natural consequence would be that processingLanguage is one of the dc:languages. This is if you see the problem from this direction. If you see the problem from the other direction, that the processingLanguge is there to be used by text processors, combine with a "best-effort" strategy for server implementations, one could end up in indexing german text with an english indexer. Which language should be set in processingLanguage in this case? It is still not the proper answer as I strongly support the #341 solution, but we could formulate a note like this. NOTE: If language has multiple values and the processingLanguage is set in the annotation, the value of the processingLanguage should be one of the values available in the language property. However, in particular cases, it is not prohibited to use a different value for the processingLanguage. -- GitHub Notification of comment by gsergiu Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/343#issuecomment-239399824 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 12 August 2016 09:17:49 UTC