- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 10:20:52 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Henri Sivonen wrote: > > I'd expect deprecated RFC 4646 language tags or subtags to render a > document non-conforming for the purpose of overall HTML5 document > conformance. Is my expectation correct? > > On a related note, the grandfathered language tag i-default seems > inappropriate for HTML5 lang or XHTML5 xml:lang, since these attributes > can take the non-RFC4646 value "" to indicate that the natural language > is unknown. Should lang='i-default' (or xml:lang='i-default') be taken > to render the document non-conforming? My intent is to defer to the relevant standards and let them decide what's valid or not. I don't think we should micromanage this, since it changes so much. (Right now HTML5 refers to RFC3066, but I'll update the reference appropriately to the moving-target reference rather than a specific RFC before we're done.) -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 10:21:27 UTC