Re: New translation: 使用<select>鏈結到本地化內容

On 30 Apr 2009, at 19:39, Ed Trager wrote:

>
> Another point I neglected to mention:  In principle, it seems sensible
> to look at the HTTP "Accept-Language" header and maybe also the
> "navigator.language" (or IE equivalent) variable.  If geolocation
> tells you "France", but the "Accept-Language" list starts with
> "Japanese", that seems informative : maybe the user prefers Japanese.
>
> The only problem --and I think it is a big problem-- is that *way* too
> often "Accept-Language" and/or "navigator.language" just say "en-US"
> -- which is much less informative.  Even in the USA, if geolocation
> says "USA" and "Accept-Language" says "en-US", the user still might
> *actually* prefer Spanish -- but of course the user has no clue how to
> set that preference in the browser.
>
> And if geolocation says something like "Bhutan" but Accept-Language
> still says "en-US", well in that case "Accept-Language" is nearly
> useless (see Chris Fynn's points about the lack of Dzonghka
> localization on most computers in Bhutan in a related posting on the
> Unicode.org mailing list a few weeks ago).
>
> So just because two items of data (geolocation + Accept-Language) are
> in agreement that it is "English" does not, unfortunately, provide
> confirmation that "English" is wanted.  It is definitely not the same
> as say, two pregnancy tests both saying that one is pregnant ...
>
> HTTP "Accept-Language" remains a conundrum -- I'm still not sure what
> to do with it ...
>
> Best - Ed

My thoughts are that, in general, Accept-Language should take  
precedence over geolocation. My reasoning being that if a user is  
savvy enough to set their preferred language for displaying pages then  
they do really want the pages in that language wherever in the world  
they are. If I were to set my browser to zh-CN then I would want my  
pages displayed in simplified chinese wherever I am in the World.

André Schappo
http://国际化域名.lboro.ac.uk/

Received on Wednesday, 6 May 2009 12:56:30 UTC