- From: Andrea Rendine <master.skywalker.88@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2015 01:45:44 +0100
- To: Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>, "public-html-comments@w3.org" <public-html-comments@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAGxST9=s2a0JCxGQU+q=snyo-2OK9RFrZVJpwjXaiOsWi-TADA@mail.gmail.com>
I know this discussion will bring me nowhere, so this message is just a reply. Yes, what I want is an indication, not the exact MIME type associated to the scripting language. Which would be useless, since even if I have <code language="application/xml"> for example, it's just plain text to be identified for search engines and maybe for syntax highlighting, UA speech syntesizers, translation tools. Code is neither to be executed nor evaluated. It's just to be set apart from any other text, because it's basically not normal text in a normal language. And while I have read more about Best Current Practices and I understand it's all about using language codes *specifically* on the Internet, it's just what is needed for this particular purpose (and it is the specific standard referred to by the spec - and last but not least, it's now something like 6 year old. Is its implementation still so controversial?). If you have read other answers to the thread, you saw that some authors use data-* attributes and this is unacceptable. Using class as suggested by the spec, however, is terrible as well because every standard is missing and class has no syntax value (as well as interfering with CSS selector). @lang, on the other hand, is not only semantically "valuable" (we are still talking about a form of identifying textual expression means), but also technically correct - consider that CSS3 has a specific selector for lang property (not only value, as it applies to an element with a @lang, as well as its descendants without a different @lang). These are my final points: 1. (esp. for mr Gannon Dick) is there any room left for an extension subtag, as defined by BCP-47 at section 2.2.6? I.e. is such a definition of any value, and could "programming" language be registered according to that procedure? 2. if the answer is negative, and/or if BCP-47 is such an unreliable standard, what are we left with? Could <code> benefit from the @language attribute as it was (uncanonically and uselessly) defined on <script> elements? <code language="whatever"> would leave all the issues about translation and speech recognition unsolved, but it would be a good point for programming language detection. Why hasn't it ever been proposed? Thanks to anybody willing to contribute.
Received on Wednesday, 18 March 2015 00:46:11 UTC