- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2009 21:02:41 +0100
- To: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
- Cc: public-i18n-core@w3.org, 'Paul Cotton' <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, 'Michael(tm) Smith' <mike@w3.org>
Richard Ishida, Wed, 9 Dec 2009 09:05:01 -0000: > Hello Leif, > > I was told that in your change proposal you will propose that the lang > attribute supports multiple language values. Whatever the reason: the one/ones who told you so was/were in error. > Although we haven't discussed > it for this particular topic, I'm certain that the i18n WG will strongly > oppose such a suggestion, based on a long history of working with and > educating about the language attributes. The main reason for this is that > the language attribute defines the language of a range of text for > text-processing purposes, which requires information about a single > language - use of multiple language values makes no sense for that. Another > reason is that for consistency similar changes would have to be made for > xml:lang - and the likelihood of that happening in the near timeframe is > essentially zero. > > For more information about this and the difference between values of > language attributes and those of the HTTP header or the meta > Content-Language element, see > http://www.w3.org/TR/i18n-html-tech-lang/#ri20040808.100519373 > > Could you please confirm to us whether you were planning to propose the > above, and if so could we please discuss this (and indeed any other > divergences from the proposal made by the i18n WG at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Oct/1086.html) before > you submit your change proposal? I have followed the debate fairly thoroughly, and I also filed the bug report that lead to Issue-88. I gave my interpretation of the I18N WG's proposal here: http://www.w3.org/mid/20091126202756258786.e7d3d2a4@xn--mlform-iua.no Perhaps be the confusing point in that letter were the following: ]] But since the meta may also be used to set the language of the document, if the lang attribute is lacking or wrongly set in the <html> element - or consciously do so, then - for that purpose - if you place multiple languages inside the meta element, then it is equal to setting multiple languages inside the lang attribute. [[ When I said the above, I meant exactly the same that you expressed in the I18N WG's proposal message which you pointed to above: ]] [4] Establish the rule that multiple values in the place that has precedence equates to lang="". [[ That is, if someone defines the audience languages like this: <meta http-equiv=content-language content="en" /> then it may also be interpreted as setting the document language to "en": <html lang="en"> Whereas if sets the audience languages to these: <meta http-equiv=content-language content="en, de, ru" /> then it must be interpreted as if the document language is unknown: <html lang="" > Please let me know if my interpretation deviates much from yours. By the way: I offered to write the change proposal because I filed the bug - I felt that was like taking responsibility for ones acts. However, I would be happy to step down from that duty, and have been considering that thought since you entered the thread asking about the next step. After all, I read that you talked with Ian at the W3C conference recently and so on - it sounded as if you were approaching and understanding. Please let me know if you think that would be in order. BR Leif Halvard Silli
Received on Wednesday, 9 December 2009 20:03:16 UTC