- From: Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>
- Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 16:07:35 +0200
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- CC: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, 'HTML WG' <public-html@w3.org>, "www-international@w3.org" <www-international@w3.org>
Julian Reschke 2008-08-22 09.06: > Leif Halvard Silli wrote: >> Ian Hickson 2008-08-21 03.36: >>> <html lang=""> only sets the language for the content of the <html> >>> element, it doesn't set the language for, e.g., comment nodes outside >>> the <html> element. See the definition of lang="" in HTML5 for details. [ ... ] > It's called "http-equiv" for a reason. Using it is equivalent to having > "Content-Language: ru" in the HTTP response, thus it applies to the > whole document. Actually, we discuss a secondary use. Hence this is not at all given. The way Ian describes it, if we have this code: <!-- Still in English! --><DOCTYPE html > <meta http-equiv="Content-Language" content="ru" > <html lang="en" > Then the META element only speaks about the HTML comment /outside/ <html/>. Very cryptic, if you ask me. Thus, the current draft opens up the possibility that the document actually isn't aimed at a Russian audience at all. It could be that the person who created the Web page only wanted to specify the language of those comments he placed outside <html />. The very idea that @http-equiv can specify the language of something @lang cannot specify /in itself/ opens for this misuse. If there actually is a need for specifying the language of a HTML comment outside <html/> (I did not know that comments inherited the language of its parent actually), then this should be linked to something else. Ian said he was open to disallow http-equiv="content-language", and so I guess that he either doesn't see any real need for specifying the language of such comments, or that he has an alternative proposal. But why not let <html lang=""> decide? -- leif halvard silli
Received on Friday, 22 August 2008 14:08:22 UTC