W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > July to September 2008

Re: meta content-language

From: Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 00:27:36 +0200
Message-ID: <48ADEBD8.9030404@malform.no>
To: "Phillips, Addison" <addison@amazon.com>
CC: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>, 'Ian Hickson' <ian@hixie.ch>, 'HTML WG' <public-html@w3.org>, "www-international@w3.org" <www-international@w3.org>

Phillips, Addison 2008-08-21 22.06:

>>> In any case, all of the http-equiv attributes are defined
>>> by HTTP. That is its definition in HTML.
>> It's not the definition in HTML5 as drafted.
> I think the point is that it should be.
> I do support having the pragma, but it should have the meaning
> defined by RFC 2616 and (normatively) it should be consistent
> with the RFCs *and nothing more*. If Frontpage or Vignette or
> whatever want to do something useful with the information,
> bully for them. But don't set the page processing language by
> fiat or change the allowed format/values.

So is it your view that not only the HTML 5 draft, but even the 
HTML 4 spec is wrong on this as well?

 From HTML 4, Section 8.1.2, Inheritance of language codes:

    An element inherits language code information according
    to the following order of precedence (highest to lowest):
      * The lang attribute set for the element itself.
      * The closest parent element that has the lang attribute
        set (i.e., the lang attribute is inherited).
      * The HTTP "Content-Language" header (which may be
        configured in a server). For example:
        Content-Language: en-cockney
      * User agent default values and user preferences.
leif halvard silli
Received on Thursday, 21 August 2008 22:28:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:40:56 UTC