- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 01:18:43 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
- Cc:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=2576 Summary: Clarify relation of language type to xml:lang Product: XML Schema Version: unspecified Platform: PC OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Datatypes: XSD Part 2 AssignedTo: cmsmcq@w3.org ReportedBy: cmsmcq@w3.org QAContact: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org In a comment of August 2004 [1], Paul Biron suggests a correction to the description of the language type, to make it accept the empty string, in the same way that the xml:lang attribute can have the empty string as a value (with the meaning: any language information given for parents does not necessarily apply here). He also suggests ensuring that xsd:language is aligned with RFC 3066 bis. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2004JulSep/0086.html In February 2005 ([2], member-only link), the WG appears to have been persuaded that a correction should be issued. [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2005Feb/0096.html I believe that since that time, a contrary view has gained ground, which holds that xml:lang should simply be defined as a union of xsd:language and a string-based type with a single enumerated value, namely the empty string. I find that approach satisfactory, myself. But the comment from Paul Biron, and the analogous comment from the SVG working group, suggest that even if we don't change xsd:language, an explanatory note would be useful. On the empty string issue, the WG needs to decide whether (a) to issue a correction to 1.0, including the empty string in the lexical and value spaces of xsd:language, (b) to do nothing, or (c) add a note observing that xml:lang and any construct intended to behave like it should be defined as a union of xsd:language and the empty string. On the 3066bis issue, the WG needs to decide whether to align xsd:language in XSD 1.0 with 3066bis, or allow our language type and the language codes specified by the IETF to go out of alignment with each other.
Received on Saturday, 10 December 2005 01:18:59 UTC