- From: Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>
- Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 00:27:36 +0200
- To: "Phillips, Addison" <addison@amazon.com>
- CC: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>, 'Ian Hickson' <ian@hixie.ch>, 'HTML WG' <public-html@w3.org>, "www-international@w3.org" <www-international@w3.org>
Phillips, Addison 2008-08-21 22.06:
>>> In any case, all of the http-equiv attributes are defined
>>> by HTTP. That is its definition in HTML.
>>
>> It's not the definition in HTML5 as drafted.
>
> I think the point is that it should be.
[...]
> I do support having the pragma, but it should have the meaning
> defined by RFC 2616 and (normatively) it should be consistent
> with the RFCs *and nothing more*. If Frontpage or Vignette or
> whatever want to do something useful with the information,
> bully for them. But don't set the page processing language by
> fiat or change the allowed format/values.
So is it your view that not only the HTML 5 draft, but even the
HTML 4 spec is wrong on this as well?
From HTML 4, Section 8.1.2, Inheritance of language codes:
An element inherits language code information according
to the following order of precedence (highest to lowest):
* The lang attribute set for the element itself.
* The closest parent element that has the lang attribute
set (i.e., the lang attribute is inherited).
* The HTTP "Content-Language" header (which may be
configured in a server). For example:
Content-Language: en-cockney
* User agent default values and user preferences.
--
leif halvard silli
Received on Thursday, 21 August 2008 22:28:34 UTC