- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 08:57:09 +0100
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>, www-international@w3.org, public-html@w3.org, 'Maciej Stachowiak' <mjs@apple.com>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@apache.org>
Ian Hickson, Thu, 11 Mar 2010 07:39:08 +0000 (UTC): > On Thu, 11 Mar 2010, "Martin J. Dürst" wrote: > When a feature is for use on a server by a server, interoperability isn't > needed and therefore the HTML5 spec is irrelevant. Servers are free to use > whatever mechanisms and conventions they want to get whatever effects they > want on their end. > >> As a result, the HTML5 spec best should just say that <meta http-equiv >> is used primarily as meta-information on the server side and is >> therefore in general ignored on the client side. > > It's not ignored on the client side in practice. Yes it is. As long as you use the @lang attribute, then META content-langauge has no effect. Hence servers should be free to use it as they want = according to the HTTP specs. So, hereby I propose a compromise solution: If the HTML document *doesn't* use the @lang attribute on the root element, then the content-language pragma is forbidden from containing more than one language tag - and this language tag will also define the language of the document. However, if the document does use the @lang attribute on the root element, then authors are free to use 'http-equiv="Content-Language"' for what it is meant for according to HTTP. -- leif halvard silli
Received on Thursday, 11 March 2010 07:57:50 UTC