- From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 15:48:57 +0100
- To: "'Leif Halvard Silli'" <lhs@malform.no>
- Cc: "'Ian Hickson'" <ian@hixie.ch>, "'HTMLWG'" <public-html@w3.org>, <www-international@w3.org>, <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Leif, I'm not sure that makes sense... The prompt for the content negotiation should come from the user agent, since it reflects the preferences of the user, not the language of a given page. The user agent sends the user's preferences (or its defaults) via the Accept-Language HTTP field, and the server uses that information to do content negotiation (if enabled on the server). If the server finds a match, it returns meta information about the document it is serving in the Content-Language field of the HTTP header. In this respect, the Content-Language header is saying: "Here is a document that is appropriate for someone who states a preference for language X". Note that it is not a foregone conclusion that the default language of the content is language X, especially in the sense where default means the language of the head and initial text in the body - for example, some poorly localized pages may have navigation content in one language while the main content is in another; other pages may be bilingual (eg. I've seen discussion fora with comments in English, Punjabi and Hindi, mixed together); other bilingual documents for French-speaking Canada may be served with a Content-Language value of 'en,fr', but may start with either language in the content. All this contributes to my feeling that the Content-Language information is a different kind of beast to the language attribute. I haven't objected to the default language being set to the value of the Content-Language in the absence of a language attribute, but in some of the above cases to do so may actually introduce errors. RI ============ Richard Ishida Internationalization Lead W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) http://www.w3.org/International/ http://rishida.net/ > -----Original Message----- > From: Leif Halvard Silli [mailto:lhs@malform.no] > Sent: 16 August 2008 01:49 > To: Richard Ishida > Cc: 'Ian Hickson'; HTMLWG; www-international@w3.org; hsivonen@iki.fi > Subject: Re: meta content-language > > Richard Ishida 2008-08-15 21.42: > > >> From: Henri Sivonen [mailto:hsivonen@iki.fi] > > > >> What purpose does metadata serve if it isn't actionable? > > > > Metadata is actionable if some application is written to use it. It is not > > actionable if the information is not available. > > Regarding the question of "actionable": Ideally, authors should be > able to add content-language information via the META tag, and > then experience that the web server - and the Web browser - use > this information to perform language negotiation. > > Richard, you made many tests of how UAs react to language tagging: > Perhaps it is possible to make test case for what web servers and > browsers do with the content-langauage information with regard to > content negotiation? > -- > leif halvard sillli
Received on Monday, 18 August 2008 14:49:33 UTC