- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 16:00:53 +0000
- To: public-i18n-core@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10152 --- Comment #11 from Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> 2011-03-09 16:00:52 UTC --- I can see - I agree - that the wording ]] Whenever the http-equiv="content-language" attribute on the <meta> element specifies the language of the root element, [[ could be made clearer. My proposal to Eliot is that the word 'specifies' is replacd with 'affects'. The point was to say that when the <meta> content-language causes HTML-parsers to _perceive_ a language, _then_ one MUST declare the language of the document. Richard, if you think that http-equiv="content-language" should be forbidden to use in polyglot markup, then it would be consistent to require that Polyglot Markup says that polyglot markup does not contain <meta> http-equiv="content-language". However, the purpose of <meta> http-equiv="content-language" is not to specify the language of the document, whether in HTML5 or in XML. The purpose is to specify who the language audience is - et cetera et cetera. If HTML5 had considered the <meta> http-equiv="content-language" as a method for specifying the language of the document, then we could say that it is forbidden in polyglot markup, as it does not specify the language in XML. But HTML5, in my reading, only acknowledges that <meta> http-equiv="content-language" *affects* the language under certain conditions, and requires UAs to let it affect the language in a uniform way. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 9 March 2011 16:00:55 UTC