- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 21:08:48 +0200
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- CC: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Ian Hickson wrote: > 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.) If you want to refer to a specific version, refer to what's current now. If you want to refer to "the latest and greatest", refer to BCP 47. BR, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 19:09:31 UTC