- From: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 13:01:07 -0500
- To: Andrew Cunningham <andrewc@vicnet.net.au>
- Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, "www-international@w3.org" <www-international@w3.org>, public-html@w3.org
On Sat, Feb 6, 2010 at 8:55 PM, Andrew Cunningham <andrewc@vicnet.net.au> wrote: > sounds overly optimistic. In practice language-detection only supports a > small number of languages with any reliability. . . . > > Also I'd suggest there are instances where lang is very useful. In > particular CJK data, where web browsers tend to select fonts based on > language declaration, in absence of appropriate styling. > > The CSS3 people are currently discussing CSS support for more advanced > OpenType support within CSS3 Fonts module. If this eventuates, then > language tagging could be used to trigger language rendering available in > an opentype font. > > lang="" could be required or not required. but language detection is a > poor reason for deciding. I think it's fair to say that right now, <html lang> is not so uniformly useful that authors need to be warned if they omit it. If the *average* page (some random hit from Google, say) doesn't have any use for it, then I don't think it should raise a warning -- warnings should be useful to most authors, not only a small minority. Otherwise you're making warnings as a whole less useful.
Received on Sunday, 7 February 2010 18:01:42 UTC