Re: renewal of the W3C Translation pages (lang query)

On Friday, May 9, 2003, 6:06:36 PM, Dan wrote:


DC> On Fri, 2003-05-09 at 09:40, Chris Lilley wrote:
>> On Friday, May 9, 2003, 3:52:37 PM, jaccoud wrote:
>>
>> jpcb> You have two options: you can use only one Pottuguese entry
>> jpcb> (pt) and put jpcb> all documents there, or create differente
>> jpcb> entries for each localization. Up jpcb> to this date, just pt-PT
>> jpcb> and pt-BR are there, but there are other jpcb> Portuguese parliant
>> jpcb> countries.
>> 
>> Since the language tags are hierarchical, a query on "pt" should
>> return those tagged as 'pt' or 'pt-BR' or 'pt-PT' or indeed
>> 'pt-anything-anything-anything' whereas a query on 'pt-BR' (or pt-br
>> or any other case mixture) should return only Brazilian Portugese
>> documents.

DC> Hmm... that's an interesting idea...

No.... its not 'an interesting idea' ;-) its how language tags have
been defined ever since RFC 2070.
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2070.txt

However, reading on, it seems you misunderstood what I was discussing.

DC>  what sort of query did you have in mind?

Neither of the ones you list below....

I meant "query" in the sense of 'the part of the URI after the ?'
because the URIs just announced for translations use ? for that. In
other words, the query parts of URIs that were just announced in this
thread.

For example to get translations for just SVG, its
http://www.w3.org/2003/03/Translations/byTechnology?technology=SVG

to get translations just in Finnish, its
http://www.w3.org/2003/03/Translations/byLanguage?language=fi

So, looking at the language= part, I was just suggesting that it
should work in the way that language tags are defined to work, which
does not seem especially unusual or interesting, just the defined and
correct way.

DC> xml:lang support in RDF query is a hairball... I don't
DC> think cwm[1] does it at all (let alone any sort of support
DC> for hierarchy); I went around for weeks claiming[2]
DC> that nobody does it, and then finally I got somebody to
DC> say "we do". Sesame or something, I think.

It would seem highly desirable that RDF could use the same xml:lang
stuff that everyone else uses. But that was not the subject of my
suggestion or of this discussion.

DC> I have no idea whether XML Query works as you expect.

Ok I guess I should ask Paul Cotton or someone (but again, that wasn't
what I was talking about although it is of course what one would
expect).

DC> I'd appreciate if you (or Martin or Liam or Michael
DC> or Massimo or anybody else, for that matter) would check.

DC> [1] see http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/

DC> [2] wow... it's been months, actually... since Feb...
DC> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2003Feb/0106.html




-- 
 Chris                            mailto:chris@w3.org

Received on Friday, 9 May 2003 12:38:10 UTC