- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 12:53:32 +0900
- To: ishida@w3.org
- Cc: www-i18n-comments@w3.org, public-i18n-core@w3.org, public-i18n-its@w3.org
Hello i18n core, This is a reply on behalf of the i18n ITS working group. See also http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3469 for our discussion. Thank you very much for your comment. We agreed to implement it. Please have a look at http://www.w3.org/International/its/itstagset/itstagset.html#langinfo-implementation , especially the note after example 38. Please let us know within 2 weeks if you are satisfied. If we don't hear from you , we will assume this issue as closed. Regards, Felix ishida@w3.org wrote: > Comment from the i18n review of: > http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-its-20060518/ > > Comment 46 > At http://www.w3.org/International/reviews/0606-its/ > Editorial/substantive: S/E > Owner: RI > > Location in reviewed document: > 5.6 > > Comment: > Should this be identified by global rules as language information? If not, we should explain why in the language information data category section. > > > FS: The current definition 6.7.1. says "The element langRule is used to express that a given piece of content(selected by the attribute langPointer) is used to express language information as defined by [RFC 3066bis]." I would add a note saying > > > "Applying this data category to xml:lang attributes does not make sense since xml:lang is already defined interms of RFC 3066 or its successor". If that would address your concern, please add it to your comment. > > > I18n: We propose a slight alteration to the above: > > > Applying the langRule data category to xml:lang attributes using global rules is not necessary, since ... > > > >
Received on Monday, 11 September 2006 03:53:56 UTC