Re: Updated Working Draft "Best Practices for XML Internationalization"

Mark Davis wrote:
>
>
> On 6/30/07, *Martin Duerst* <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp 
> <mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>> wrote:
>
>     [first, with chair hat on: Mark and others, please try to reduce
>     your quoted content.]
>
>     At 03:45 07/07/01, Mark Davis wrote:
>     >The title appears misleading. There are multiple ways to
>     internationalize XML documents. Only a few of the practices are
>     general; the thrust of the document appears to be using ITS to do
>     so, so a more apt title would be
>     >
>     >>Best Practices for XML Internationalization
>     >=>
>     >Best Practices for XML Internationalization using ITS
>
>     The document should definitely be general, not limited to ITS.
>     So it's not the title that should be changed, but maybe some
>     of the contents.
>
>     Of course, there are several ways to internationalize documents,
>     and this should be taken into account. However, ITS is a W3C
>     Recommendation, so using lots of examples from ITS and listing
>     ITS as the first choice, etc., seem to be appropriate.
>
>
>     >> Include <http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#sec-lang-tag>xml:lang in
>     your DTD or schema to allow to specify the natural language of the
>     content
>     >=>
>     >Where necessary, include
>     <http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#sec-lang-tag>xml:lang in your DTD
>     or schema to allow to specify the natural language of the content.
>     >
>     >[why? because an XML document that just has locale-independent
>     information like inventory counts of part numbers doesn't want to
>     have this. Ditto below.]
>
>     Agreed, but the wording should be different. "where necessary"
>     doesn't
>     say anything specific. I'd go for a wording more along the following
>     lines:
>
>     Include <http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#sec-lang-tag>xml:lang in
>     your DTD or schema to allow to specify the natural language of the
>     content for all elements that may contain natual language. 
>
>
> That really doesn't capture it. If your DTD doesn't have natural 
> language content, there is no need for xml:lang.

I would prefer Martin's wording and add after "may contain natrual 
language.": "If your DTD doesn't have natural language content, there is 
no need for xml:lang."

The "may contain" is important since there are cases which depend on the 
actual use, like the <code> element in HTML.

Felix

>
>     >> Make sure the
>     <http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#sec-lang-tag>xml:lang attribute is
>     available for the root element of your document, and for any
>     element where a change of language may occur.
>     >
>     >=>
>     >If you documents can contain text of different languages, make
>     sure the <http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#sec-lang-tag>xml:lang
>     attribute is available for the root element of your document. If
>     it can contain mixed languages, make sure it is available for any
>     element where a change of language may occur.
>
>     The "changed of language" may easily be misunderstood to have the
>     markup mean 'from now on', rather than 'for this nested element'.
>
>
>     >Same changes for other cases, like #2, #7,...
>     >
>     >>Best Practice 19: Use CDATA sections with caution
>     >I'd like to see this be:
>     >=> Best Practice 19: Avoid CDATA sections wherever possible
>
>     I'd tend to agree here.
>
>     Regards,    Martin.
>
>
>
>     #-#-#  Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
>     #-#-#  http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp       mailto:
>     duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp <mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Mark

Received on Monday, 2 July 2007 03:55:22 UTC