- From: Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
- Date: Sat, 19 May 2007 10:30:03 +0900
- To: Najib Tounsi <ntounsi@emi.ac.ma>, Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
- Cc: www-international@w3.org, "'LTRU Working Group'" <ltru@ietf.org>
Hello Richard, Najib, At 07:25 07/05/19, Najib Tounsi wrote: > >Hi Richard, > >My feedback is perhaps subjective. My feeling is that, in some places, the text is not sufficently clear for those who don't speak English fluently. > >Anyway, here are some remarks (about http://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-no-language#undetermined) > >- You write >"For example, xml:lang="" might be used if text is included into a document from a database that doesn't provide language information..." >It is the text or the document which is from a database? The text of course. >Should I understand this: >For example, xml:lang="" might be used if text is to be included into a document and (the text) comes from a database that doesn't provide language information ...? Very good point. >-You write >"The effect would be to cancel any language information declared higher up the hierarchy of elements in the document." >What do "cancel any language" means? > - remove the language information declared higher up the hierarchy? Wrong > - override this declaration by the new one "und"? Right > >Finally the whole story (about the use of "und") is, if you can "leave out the markup", go ahead. Mark up only if "you have a particular need to indicate that the language is undefined". Right? I was also a bit surprised by this. It's easy to read this as "language tagging, so who cares?". It looks like it's quite in contrast to what we say on language tags otherwise. Regards, Martin. #-#-# Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University #-#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp
Received on Saturday, 19 May 2007 07:18:03 UTC