W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > January to March 2015

LDP WG response to i18n-ISSUE-410: Language tags should reference BCP 47

From: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 12:34:51 -0400
To: Steven Atkin <atkin@us.ibm.com>
Cc: public-ldp-comments@w3.org, www-international@w3.org
Message-ID: <20150327163450.GA8291@w3.org>
* Steven Atkin <atkin@us.ibm.com> [2015-03-05 10:00-0700]
> 
>     In section 3.0 the definition of a language tag should refer to BCP 47
>     rather than including the definition from Turtle. You might want to
>     consider referencing obs langtag in bcp47

https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ldpwg/raw-file/ldpatch/ldpatch.html#conformance
now says [[
Parsers should treat Literals as being composed of a lexical form and
an optional language tag [BCP47] (as used by Turtle [Turtle]) or
datatype IRI.
]]

You'll note that it just follows the convention of RDF specs in
referring to a "languag tag", and not either the "Language-Tag" or
"obs-language-tag" productions. I read the difference as guidance to
folks inventing e.g. language tags for regional dialects, etc.  I'm
not sure how much RDF falls into that camp, rather than simply
representing existing language tags. My temptation is to stick with
the convention so that one spec doesn't apparently contradict another.
Steven, do the edits above (and the preference for intra-spec
consistency over specificity) address i18n-ISSUE-410?
-- 
-ericP

office: +1.617.599.3509
mobile: +33.6.80.80.35.59

(eric@w3.org)
Feel free to forward this message to any list for any purpose other than
email address distribution.

There are subtle nuances encoded in font variation and clever layout
which can only be seen by printing this message on high-clay paper.
Received on Friday, 27 March 2015 16:34:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 21 September 2016 22:37:39 UTC