- From: Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>
- Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 16:07:35 +0200
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- CC: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, 'HTML WG' <public-html@w3.org>, "www-international@w3.org" <www-international@w3.org>
Julian Reschke 2008-08-22 09.06:
> Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
>> Ian Hickson 2008-08-21 03.36:
>>> <html lang=""> only sets the language for the content of the <html>
>>> element, it doesn't set the language for, e.g., comment nodes outside
>>> the <html> element. See the definition of lang="" in HTML5 for details.
[ ... ]
> It's called "http-equiv" for a reason. Using it is equivalent to having
> "Content-Language: ru" in the HTTP response, thus it applies to the
> whole document.
Actually, we discuss a secondary use. Hence this is not at all
given. The way Ian describes it, if we have this code:
<!-- Still in English! --><DOCTYPE html >
<meta http-equiv="Content-Language" content="ru" >
<html lang="en" >
Then the META element only speaks about the HTML comment /outside/
<html/>. Very cryptic, if you ask me.
Thus, the current draft opens up the possibility that the document
actually isn't aimed at a Russian audience at all. It could be
that the person who created the Web page only wanted to specify
the language of those comments he placed outside <html />.
The very idea that @http-equiv can specify the language of
something @lang cannot specify /in itself/ opens for this misuse.
If there actually is a need for specifying the language of a HTML
comment outside <html/> (I did not know that comments inherited
the language of its parent actually), then this should be linked
to something else.
Ian said he was open to disallow http-equiv="content-language",
and so I guess that he either doesn't see any real need for
specifying the language of such comments, or that he has an
alternative proposal. But why not let <html lang=""> decide?
--
leif halvard silli
Received on Friday, 22 August 2008 14:08:24 UTC