- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2013 19:05:13 +0100
- To: "Phillips, Addison" <addison@lab126.com>
- CC: www-international <www-international@w3.org>, "public-multilingualweb-lt-comments@w3.org" <public-multilingualweb-lt-comments@w3.org>
Hi Addison, thanks for the feedback - we had something like this in a previous ITS2 draft, see the localeFilterType attribute at http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20120731/#EX-locale-filter-selector-1 the only difference to what you propose is that localeFilterType is a separate attribute in addition to a main "list" attribute, whereas you have two attributes. Best, Felix Am 04.03.13 18:48, schrieb Phillips, Addison: > Hi Felix, > > Language tags (and language ranges) are mostly about selection, so there is no built-in means of doing what you're looking for. I don't think adding such a subtag would be a good idea either (where would you put it where it wouldn't be disturbed by a fallback mechanism? What happens if your value is a language priority list?). > > I think a better means of doing this is having a separate attribute that is like "its-locale-filter-list", only as an exclusion list ("its-locale-exclusion-list"). Then it is easy to write: > > <p its-locale-filter-list="*-CA">Legal notice for Canada</p> > <p its-locale-exclusion-list="*-CA">Legal notice for all other countries</p> > > Addison > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org] >> Sent: Monday, March 04, 2013 9:40 AM >> To: www-international >> Cc: public-multilingualweb-lt-comments@w3.org >> Subject: "Saying that something is not in a locale" with BCP 47 >> >> Hi all, >> >> at >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb- >> lt/2013Feb/0318.html >> the MLW-LT WG is discussing a use case of expressing that something is not in >> a locale. One way to do this is to add a flag to a BCP 47 value, see above cited >> mail. Another way could be to have in a markup environment an additional >> attribute expressing the "include" vs "exclude" options for the BCP 47 value. >> >> Thoughts? This is probably an additional piece of information rather than part >> of a BCP47 value itself. Has such a use case been discussed for BCP47 values? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Felix >> >> (this is action-454 for the MLW-LT WG)
Received on Monday, 4 March 2013 18:05:43 UTC