- From: Markus Ernst <derernst@gmx.ch>
- Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 11:44:45 +0200
Am 31.08.2010 22:21 schrieb Martin Janecke: > Am 31.08.10 21:40, schrieb Aryeh Gregor: >> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 5:25 AM, Martin Janecke<whatwg.org at kaor.in> >> wrote: >>> Besides,<time>2010</time> in a British news article would allow >>> users e.g. >>> in Japan to have these dates displayed as ?22?. That's clearly an >>> advantage >>> over the number 2010 alone. >> >> I would say the opposite. If they can read the English news article, >> they'll necessarily know what "2010" means. But they might not be >> able to read Japanese. Maybe they're borrowing a Japanese person's >> computer, for example, or maybe the browser's idea of the user >> language is otherwise wrong. >> >> Also, content that behaves differently based on the browser settings >> of the viewer is confusing and can cause hard-to-debug problems. >> Users will think that the author of that British article actually >> wrote out a Japanese date, and be completely at a loss to explain why. >> Even if they can actually understand the date, the incongruity will >> look like a bug. >> >> It could be outright misleading if there are two year display formats >> that look the same but actually have different meaning. A plain year >> number in Arabic numerals like 2010 could refer to any number of >> totally different year-numbering conventions, and the only way to tell >> them apart currently is the page's context. Having the browser change >> the number to some convention that doesn't match its surroundings >> makes it impossible to guess the convention. >> >> And finally, it just looks weird. I would find it extremely strange >> to have all dates on pages I'm reading replaced with Hebrew dates, >> even though I understand those just fine. I wouldn't want that at >> all, and I find it hard to believe that many actual users do in real >> life. >> >> Basically, any kind of attempt to have browsers localize dates that >> are actually displayed in content is a terrible idea, and the spec >> should remove all mention of any such thing. I'm pretty sure I've >> said all this before, though. >> > > I understand your point, the situation you describe would be unfavorable > indeed. > > However, there's no need to make this unfavorable. The localized display > of times and dates can be realized via tooltips for example, as it is > often seen with abbreviations in texts. The localized date doesn't have > to be a replacement for the original date string but can be a helpful, > explaining addition. This is a nice idea, but localisation should then be based on the language of the context of the time element, not based on the browser language: <html lang="de"> <body> <p>Die Party ist <time datetime="2010-09-01">heute</time>.</p> </body> </html> The tooltip might then display "1. September 2010" in German - independent from the computer or browser language. As Aryeh stated, displaying a Japanese or English date here on the computer in an internet caf? would be highly disturbing - even in a tooltip. Localisation should not mess around with the content unless explicitly triggered by the author. -- Markus
Received on Wednesday, 1 September 2010 02:44:45 UTC