RE: Comments on BP Specify the language of the content

> From: Martin Duerst [mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp] 
> Sent: 16 March 2007 06:58
> To: Richard Ishida; public-i18n-its@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Comments on BP Specify the language of the content
> 
> At 02:51 07/03/16, Richard Ishida wrote:
> 
> >Your DTD or schema should provide the xml:lang attribute for 
> this purpose. 
> >See: Best Practice 1: Provide xml:lang to specify natural language 
> >content for more information.
> >
> >       Well it could also provide it's own attribute if it's 
> a legacy 
> >       format.  We should acknowledge that.
> 
> I'm not sure how much "any legacy attribute name is okay" 
> makes sense as a best practice. Practice yes, but *best* 
> practice? In case we decide to mention this, we should be 
> extremely careful to make sure that this is not misunderstood.

I agree.

> 
> >Background information
> >
> >    * Internationalization FAQ: xml:lang in XML document schemas.
> >      http://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-when-xmllang
> >
> >
> >       I don't think this is interest to content authors.
> 
> But the best practices are mostly for schema designers, not 
> authors, yes?

Both, actually.  And that best practice is in a section for content authors
in particular.  There's another bp for schema developers at the beginning of
the document. 


> 
> >Reference links
> >
> >    * The values to use with xml:lang to specify a language.
> >      http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4646.txt
> 
> This should very clearly mention BCP 47. In some months, we 
> expect to have a new RFC with a new number.

I agree. Sorry I missed that one.

RI


-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.13/726 - Release Date: 18/03/2007
15:34

Received on Tuesday, 20 March 2007 08:23:07 UTC