- From: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
- Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 21:42:34 +0000 (GMT)
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> That would be appropriate to a multipart entity, perhaps comprising The English/Maori example seems very much to me to refer to a single page, but, for a concrete example, try: <http://www.ocrat.com/biling/pridprej/chap0101.html> (note that this is undeclared charset=gb2312 and has no language markup/headers). Whilst this particular example has a bias towards English users, if you look at it without the automation features it could be used in the learning of either of the languages. Basically, the ability to use the HTTP Content-Language is a last resort default, not, I believe, a suggestion that that is the preferred method. If it were the preferred method, then including it with meta would have to be the de facto preferred method, given the difficult people seem to have with specifying charset with real headers. As such, it would seem to me a much more ugly solution (in my view, meta was largely added for bad reasons, and, in some cases has actually caused the atrophy of much more hyperlink like alternatives).
Received on Friday, 22 March 2002 02:06:30 UTC