- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 12:29:29 -0700
- To: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
- Cc: 'Ian Hickson' <ian@hixie.ch>, www-international@w3.org, public-html@w3.org
- Message-id: <9711B030-A1EB-46F0-ADFB-32B44664F565@apple.com>
On Apr 1, 2010, at 12:27 PM, Richard Ishida wrote: > Issue-88 was discussed last night at the i18n telecon. These are our > current thoughts about the change proposal at > http://www.w3.org/International/wiki/Htmlissue88 Thanks for the update. > The i18n WG is now satisfied with regard to proposals [1], [4] and > [5] and > thanks the editor for the changes made to the specification. Would you be willing to update the Change Proposal to remove points [1], [4] and [5], so that we can be clear about the proposed changes still under discussion? > > There are two items remaining. Ian, comments on the two points below would be appreciated. > > [[ > [3] Change: > "For meta elements with an http-equiv attribute in the Content > Language > state, the content attribute must have a value consisting of a valid > BCP 47 > language code. [BCP47]" > to > "For meta elements with an http-equiv attribute in the Content > Language > state, the content attribute must have a value consisting of one or > more > valid BCP 47 language codes, separated by commas. [BCP47]" > ]] > > Since the algorithm just above this text now allows for treatment of a > comma-separated list of values in determining the pragma-set default > language, we suspect that it might be an oversight that this text > wasn't > changed. > > > [[ > [2] Add an additional note just before the numbered list in the > section > about Content language state, with the following text: > > "Note: Declarations in the HTTP header and the Content Language > pragma are > metadata, referring to the document as a whole and expressing the > expected > language or languages of the audience of the document. On the other > hand, a > language attribute on an element describes the actual language used > in the > range of content bounded by that element (and so values are limited > to a > single language at a time)." > > Rationale: To clarify why the HTTP and pragma declarations are > different > when it comes to values, and how they should be used. This is a > constant > source of confusion. > ]] > > On balance, we would still prefer to see a note of this kind in the > spec, if > the editor agrees.
Received on Thursday, 1 April 2010 19:30:04 UTC