Re: meta content-language

Richard Ishida wrote:
> +1 to the arguments that many people on this thread have already been making
> (while I was away) for avoiding the redefinition of meta content-language in
> HTML5.  I'd just like to add a couple of points.
>   

+1 from me too.

> First, if we're looking for a way of using the meta element rather than
> disallowing it, why not simply  propose that it be treated as equivalent to
> an HTTP header declaration, and clearly specify that browsers can use the
> initial item in any sequence of values for the meta content-language as a
> fallback for the default text-processing language where there is no language
> attribute. 

just to be sure: you mean "where there is no language attribute at the 
<html> element", right?

>  I believe that this was the original intent, and I suspect that
> this would be consistent with its use in current pages, while still
> preserving the possibility to use the meta element principally as metadata.
> ( Of course, one would then need to define the relationship between any HTTP
> header and the meta tag when both are applied to a page.)
>
> Second, I don't think we should base our rationale for features solely on
> past or current practice.  Eg, even though there are few applications
> processing in-document language metadata at the moment, it seems feasible to
> me that there may be in the future, and that we shouldn't close the door on
> that possibility by changing the meta element to be yet another way of just
> setting the text-processing language - especially since we currently have a
> way of allowing for both attributes and meta data to co-exist.
>   

+1.

Felix

> RI 
>
> ============
> Richard Ishida
> Internationalization Lead
> W3C (World Wide Web Consortium)
>
> http://www.w3.org/International/
> http://rishida.net/
>
>
>
>

Received on Thursday, 28 August 2008 01:16:58 UTC