- From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
- Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 15:00:53 -0400
- To: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
- Cc: www-international@w3.org
Richard Ishida scripsit: > > I'm really leery about this one. It is extremely fragile. If > > you really wanted to mark the language of an HTML document > > pointed to, this is something that the browser would have a > > much better job of doing, since it could fetch the start of > > the page (working in the background) and pick up the actual > > language used on the page. So if you are evangelizing anyone, > > I'd think it'd be browser vendors. > > I agree that it's something you should be very careful about, but people > are doing it and recommending it. Note that the best practise doesn't > recommend that you do this - it says that you should carefully consider > the pros and cons - and I think we point out quite a few cons. I take > the approach that we can't simply dismiss this out of hand, but we can > make people think carefully about whether it's the right thing to do. As I understand it, the operational purpose of hreflang (I have no idea which browsers do this, if any) is to set the Accept-Language: header in any HTTP transaction used to fetch the document. That way you can link to a specific-language version of a document. The XInclude analogue is the accept-language attribute. -- Do what you will, John Cowan this Life's a Fiction cowan@ccil.org And is made up of http://www.ccil.org/~cowan Contradiction. --William Blake
Received on Wednesday, 14 March 2007 19:00:58 UTC