- From: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 09:20:34 -0400
- To: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>, Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org, w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org
At 08:41 03/07/22 -0400, Frank Manola wrote: >Why is this (apparently) restricted to "natural language text that may >require markup", as opposed to something more general like "text that >contains markup"? The point is that people who use XML as a data exchange >representation (ala SOAP messages and so on) don't necessarily think of >that XML as being "natural language text", and type rdf:XMLLiteral is >there to represent XML literals of all kinds. I think this is a valid point. Please note that I18N has never said that XML Literals could not be used for data exchange. But it is extremely important to make sure that the reader gets the message that XML literals can be used, and should be used, for text with markup. >>In such cases, a language tag, if required, must be explicitly included >>within the markup, usually as the value of a xml:lang or lang attribute, >>possibly on a span or div element, additional to the principal content >>[XHTML]. ]] >>The informative reference to XHTML is new. This should be changed so as to not give the impression that XHTML may always be appropriate, and to make clear that this in essence changes the actual markup. Regards, Martin.
Received on Tuesday, 22 July 2003 10:02:20 UTC