- From: Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>
- Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 20:10:41 +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 16.58: > Leif Halvard Silli wrote: >>>> 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 />. >>> >>> I don't believe this is a change from HTML4. >> >> There is a change here. The current draft has removed the http-equiv >> functionality from the META element. This means that the author now is >> "free" to use it to specify the comments outside <html/>, because he >> isn't actually specifying the language preferences of his intended >> audience anymore. > > I do agree that the current spec language that suggest that it is > different from HTTP needs to be backed out (for instance, wrt multiple > languages). > > That being said, *this* specific case seems to be in line with what > previous specs said. I agree that when we read HTML 4, then the only place an HTML comment outside <html/> can inherit its language from, is the "content-language", whether "content-language" comes from the server or from the META element. >> To use "content-language" for that purpose in HTML 4, would be a misuse. > > How so? If the document is intended for an English speaking audience, and I - whether via the server or via the META element - announce "Content-Language: ru" because I want to specify the language of the comments outside <html />, then I have changed the "Content-Language" for the wrong reason. Allthough, strictly speaking, perhaps I only do a very stupid thing. And perhaps I only misuse HTTP, and not HTML. > Is this about the difference between meta/@http-equiv='content-language' > and the Content-Language HTTP header? There you have another point. I could use META to say "content-language:ru" - in order to specify the language of those comments, and use the HTTP header to say "content-language:en". In a way, this could be seen as merely a way of outsmarting the system. The HTTP header would of course be the authorative source anyhow, for those things which the "Content-Language" is designed for. -- leif halvard silli
Received on Friday, 22 August 2008 18:11:34 UTC