RE: [techs] Test 49 Suggestion

Tex, 

I agree with your concern about 'requiring', but please read carefully
http://www.w3.org/International/geo/html-tech/tech-lang.html before
continuing with this thread, noting the recommendations that touch on
documents with multiple primary languages and the careful use of the terms
'primary language' and 'text-processing language'.

Let's also maintain a separate thread about the WCAG techniques and/or
guidelines, otherwise this will become totally confusing (note that I didn't
address the lack of clarity in the WCAG techniques in my mail - we have sent
comments on that before).

RI

============
Richard Ishida
W3C

contact info:
http://www.w3.org/People/Ishida/ 

W3C Internationalization:
http://www.w3.org/International/ 

Publication blog:
http://people.w3.org/rishida/blog/
 
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tex Texin [mailto:tex@i18nguy.com] 
> Sent: 14 February 2005 18:00
> To: Richard Ishida
> Cc: 'Michael Cooper'; 'WAI WCAG List'; public-i18n-core@w3.org
> Subject: Re: [techs] Test 49 Suggestion
> 
> I think this bears a little discussion. I agreed with 
> Richard's wording but noted that Michael spoke of requiring it.
> 
> A *requirement* for html elements to have a lang attribute, 
> is different from the recommendation that it is a good idea 
> to have it specified.
> 
> Perhaps in the context of the test guidelines, requirement 
> has a special meaning. If not, we should not insist on html 
> elements having a lang attribute.
> 
> For one, the head contents can have their own langs, as 
> noted. For my pages, I sometimes translate the content 
> descriptions and keywords, etc.
> and so the head has no single language. (I wish we could have multiple
> titles!)
> 
> For two, unfortunately a document can only have one primary 
> language, even though there are documents that are 
> multilingual in nature and may not have one overriding language.
> It would therefore be misleading to force the multilingual 
> document to have a single primary language and should be 
> quite fine to move the lang attribute to the body or lower in 
> the document. (Anyone try html with two bodies?)
> 
> For most documents the recommendation is quite right, put the 
> lang attribute on the html element. But I would be careful 
> with *requiring* it.
> 
> I noted also that the guideline refers to language setting by 
> http. If this is referring to content-language, that 
> describes the intended audience, not the language of the 
> document, and they may be different.
> And I never quite figured out what to do if the 
> content-language listed multiple languages, since the 
> document can only be assigned one primary language.
> Is there another way for http to declare the language of a document?
> If not, the guidelines should clarify the distinction.
> 
> tex
> 
> 
> Richard Ishida wrote:
> > 
> > Apologies. This links is much better than the one below:
> > http://www.w3.org/International/geo/html-tech/tech-lang.html
> > 
> > ============
> > Richard Ishida
> > W3C
> > 
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: public-i18n-core-request@w3.org 
> > > [mailto:public-i18n-core-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of 
> Richard Ishida
> > > Sent: 14 February 2005 15:43
> > > To: 'Michael Cooper'; 'WAI WCAG List'
> > > Cc: public-i18n-core@w3.org
> > > Subject: RE: [techs] Test 49 Suggestion
> > >
> > >
> > > [Copying i18n]
> > >
> > > Just noticed this.  Please do not recommend putting language 
> > > information on the body element.  Please strongly 
> recommend that it 
> > > be put on the html element.
> > >
> > > Please also look at http://www.w3.org/TR/i18n-html-tech-lang/
> > > before designing your test.
> > >
> > >
> > > Also, note that the test procedure is incorrect in step 
> 6.  A French 
> > > Canadian document may be marked up as fr-CA, which is 
> more than just 
> > > a ISO
> > > 639 language code.  (Another example, Simplified Chinese may be 
> > > zh-Hans, using a special IANA-registered code.)  The correct 
> > > reference point is RFC
> > > 3066 *or it's successors* (since one is currently in 
> preparation).  
> > > This is a large set of possibilities, so I'm not sure how 
> you will 
> > > easily be able to test that the code is correct.
> > >
> > > Alternatively, you might recommend that the *first part* of the 
> > > langauge code is an ISO 639 or IANA registered code.
> > > Just thought that up, so I'm not sure whether it makes sense.
> > >
> > > Also, you should reconsider your test files
> > > - the examples shown seem to assume an XML MIME type, rather than 
> > > text/html by saying that the lang attribute is invalid
> > > -     or did you mean that the language attribute value,
> > > "language", is
> > > invalid? - in which case, you should still specify the MIME type 
> > > used (ie.
> > > currently text/html)
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > RI
> > >
> > >
> > > ============
> > > Richard Ishida
> > > W3C
> > >
> > > contact info:
> > > http://www.w3.org/People/Ishida/
> > >
> > > W3C Internationalization:
> > > http://www.w3.org/International/
> > >
> > > Publication blog:
> > > http://people.w3.org/rishida/blog/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org
> > > > [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Michael Cooper
> > > > Sent: 14 February 2005 15:11
> > > > To: WAI WCAG List
> > > > Subject: RE: [techs] Test 49 Suggestion
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I think there is nothing wrong with providing the "lang"
> > > > attribute on the <body> element, but I think we should
> > > still require
> > > > it on the <html> element. This is a place we can expect
> > > user agents to
> > > > be consistent in looking for the attribute. Also, there are
> > > elements
> > > > in the <head> section of the document that require language 
> > > > information, such as the title, description, keywords, and
> > > potentially
> > > > others. While it possible to see the attribute on those
> > > individually,
> > > > I just think it is good practice to have the attribute at
> > > the highest
> > > > level possible. Michael
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Chris Ridpath [mailto:chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca]
> > > > > Sent: February 11, 2005 2:54 PM
> > > > > To: WAI WCAG List
> > > > > Cc: y.p.hoitink@heritas.nl; Michael Cooper
> > > > > Subject: [techs] Test 49 Suggestion
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Yvette suggested that another way to pass test 49 [1] would
> > > > be to put
> > > > > a lang attribute on the body tag. e.g. <body lang="nl>
> > > > >
> > > > > Should we permit this? Or do we always require that the HTML 
> > > > > lang
> > > > > attribute(s) be set?
> > > > >
> > > > > Chris
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/test49.html
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> 
> --
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> Tex Texin   cell: +1 781 789 1898   mailto:Tex@XenCraft.com
> Xen Master                          http://www.i18nGuy.com
>                          
> XenCraft		            http://www.XenCraft.com
> Making e-Business Work Around the World
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>

Received on Monday, 14 February 2005 18:34:53 UTC