RE: Additional thoughts on language specification

I disagree with Jens and Roberto: some language- techniques for
specifying language may *not* be sufficient for accessibility pruposes.

For example, the http content-language header is probably not
sufficient.  According to the I18N Working Group:
<blockquote
cite="http://www.w3.org/International/tutorials/language-decl/en/all.htm
l#Slide0060">
HTTP Content-Language header

The HTTP Content-Language header is set on the server and sent with a
file.

It can specify more than one language at a time. This is appropriate for
declaring primary languages, but not for declaring text-processing
language, which
can only be a single language at a time.

This declaration is overriden by any declaration using attributes on the
html tag.

If no language is declared on the html tag, some, but not all,
mainstream browsers recognise the value declared in the HTTP header for
text-processing applications.
Even in a browser that recognises this declaration, however,
availability of this information for specific applications tends to be
somewhat uneven.
</blockquote>

The I18N Working Group also recommends *against* using the <meta>
element with content-language:

<blockquote
cite="http://www.w3.org/International/tutorials/language-decl/en/all.htm
l#Slide0060">
Meta element with Content-Language

The use of a meta element in the document head with the http-equiv
attribute set to Content-Language is not mentioned in the HTML
specification at all,
and yet much of the informal guidance out on the Web about how to
declare language for your HTML suggests its use, and some well-known
HTML authoring tools
create such elements when you specify language information using dialog
boxes.

Unfortunately, there is little if any evidence that any mainstream
browsers recognise such declarations for implementation of
text-processing features.
Nor is there much evidence of search engines using this information as
meta-data about the document.

For this reason, it seems wise to avoid the use of this approach for
now.

Since the arguments of the content attribute on the meta element allow
for multiple languages to be expressed, this approach would seem to lend
itself to
declaration of primary language metadata rather than text-processing
language. As such, it is the only currently available mechanism for
authors to declare
such metadata inside the document, and therefore potentially useful. To
what extent metadata users use the information is still not clear,
however. It
is also possible to argue whether it makes sense to have metadata inside
the document.
</blockquote>

"Good design is accessible design."

Dr. John M. Slatin, Director 
Accessibility Institute
University of Texas at Austin 
FAC 248C 
1 University Station G9600 
Austin, TX 78712 
ph 512-495-4288, fax 512-495-4524 
email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu 
Web http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility 



-----Original Message-----
From: public-wcag-teamb-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-wcag-teamb-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Stottlemyer,
Diane L.
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 8:39 AM
To: Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG); public-wcag-teamb@w3.org
Subject: RE: Additional thoughts on language specification



I think this is an important point for xml- 
 
"Specifiying a "lang"/"xml:lang" attribute is an easy and sufficient way
to
    declare the language of a document."

________________________________

From: public-wcag-teamb-request@w3.org on behalf of Roberto Scano
(IWA/HWG)
Sent: Mon 9/12/2005 9:35 AM
To: public-wcag-teamb@w3.org
Subject: Re: Additional thoughts on language specification




Agree with Jens.

----- Messaggio originale -----
    Da: "Jens Meiert"<jens.meiert@erde3.com>
    Inviato: 12/09/05 14.49.13
    A: "public-wcag-teamb@w3.org"<public-wcag-teamb@w3.org>
    Oggetto: Re: Additional thoughts on language specification
   
   
    > I think to pass this success criterion, each of the following
    > techniques is in itself sufficient: specifying the language in
HTTP
    > headers or using the meta technique or lang-attribute of the HTML
    > element or the xml:lang-attribute of the HTML element.
   
    Exactly.
   
    > We could recommend specifying the language in the http headers
(either
    > by manipulating the HTTP headers directly or by using the meta
    > technique) combined with the lang + xml:lang attributes of the
HTML
    > element.
   
    Since the former techniques all are sufficient, I disagree. From my
point of
    view, we should recommend the use of "lang"/"xml:lang" attributes
alone. The
    problem with HTTP headers is that this information is not available
in local
    copies, and the combination of HTTP headers and "lang" attributes
bears the
    risk of contradictory declarations (where HTTP headers win).
   
    Specifiying a "lang"/"xml:lang" attribute is an easy and sufficient
way to
    declare the language of a document.
   
   
    --
    Jens Meiert
    Information Architect
   
    http://meiert.com/
   
    http://uitest.com/ < Reloaded
   
   
   

[Messaggio troncato. Toccare Modifica->Segna per il download per
recuperare la restante parte.]






* Confidentiality/Privacy Notice -  The documents included in this
transmission may contain information that is confidential and/or legally
privileged.  If you are not the intended recipient, or the employee or
agent responsible for delivering the information to the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying,
distribution, or action taken in reliance on the contents of these
documents is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this document in
error, please notify the sender immediately to arrange for return or
destruction of these documents.

Received on Monday, 12 September 2005 14:06:26 UTC