RE: Language tags on root

I like the idea of specifying the primary language on the root, 
and then specifying other languages as they occur in the tree.

The code for multiple languages is "mul":
   http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/englangn.html#mn

I agree that xml:lang must not be changed to take a list of 
languages.

The appropriate way to provide a list of languages is to use 
the appropriate HTTP header and/or the <meta> element.  HTML 
allows:

   <meta http-equiv="Content-Language" content="fr, de, en">

Looking quickly through the public XHTML 2 draft, I couldn't 
find a mention of http-equiv.  Is it still there?

Misha


-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-i18n-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-i18n-ig-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Stephen Deach
Sent: 27 January 2005 16:02
To: Richard Ishida; public-i18n-core@w3.org; i18n IG
Subject: Language tags on root (was: Re: XHTML2 review - Please check)



If you recommend/require xml:lang on the html element, don't come up
with a 
value for "mixed", instead set the "primary"/"default" language there;
then 
allow xml:lang on subnodes within head/body as needed for other
languages 
in a mixed-language document. (In fact, it has been my regular 
recommendation for language tagging of all XML document formats to place
a 
default/primary language tag on the root node or the highest node above
any 
text content; then explicitly subtag any language changes (excluding 
"adopted words", but always tag a word/phrase/etc. you wish to be 
hyphenated/spell-checked/grammar-checked using a different dictionary
than 
the base language).

I don't remember how/if Dublin Core handles mixed-language docs (some dc

entries allow lists of values, others don't), but you might consider a 
metadata component to indicate mixed-language content is present.

It would be of significant impact to existing applications to change 
xml:lang to allow a list, and probably add greater ambiguity/confusion;
it 
would be better to add another attribute to carry a list of contained 
languages on the root node is you want it for go/no-go type decisions
over 
whether you can accept/read the doc and allow xml:lang to set the 
primary/default language.

--SDeach

At 2005.01.27-14:49(+0000), Richard Ishida wrote:

>I have updated the table of review comments at
>
>http://www.w3.org/International/2004/10/xhtml2-i18n-review.html
>
>Please check the text and tell me whether I can send to the HTML group.
>
>You should check, in particular, comments 38a to the end plus any other

>comments with a number followed by a,b or c.
>
>Also: When I spoke with Steven Pemberton a few days ago, he said why
don't 
>we request that xml:lang be mandatory on the html tag.  Perhaps we
could 
>discuss this at the next meeting. Of course, the sticking point would
be 
>where you have a mulilingual document. However, may be better to think
of 
>an appropriate value for such documents rather than simply abandon the 
>possibility of solving once and for all the problem of people not
marking 
>up documents with language information.
>
>RI
>
>
>
>
>============
>Richard Ishida
>W3C
>
>contact info:
>http://www.w3.org/People/Ishida/
>
>W3C Internationalization:
>http://www.w3.org/International/
>
>Publication blog:
>http://people.w3.org/rishida/blog/
>


---Steve Deach
    sdeach@adobe.com 





-----------------------------------------------------------------
        Visit our Internet site at http://www.reuters.com

Get closer to the financial markets with Reuters Messaging - for more
information and to register, visit http://www.reuters.com/messaging

Any views expressed in this message are those of  the  individual
sender,  except  where  the sender specifically states them to be
the views of Reuters Ltd.

Received on Thursday, 27 January 2005 16:20:57 UTC