3469 2006-07-14 20:04:00 +0000 Example 19 xml:lang 2006-10-03 14:40:31 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified ITS ITS tagset LastCall PC Windows XP CLOSED FIXED proposalAccepted, reviewerSatisfied P2 normal AfterLC 1 ysavourel fsasaki fsasaki oldest_to_newest 10524 0 ysavourel 2006-07-14 20:04:00 +0000 Issue #46 of i18nCore comments: http://www.w3.org/International/reviews/0606-its/ Section 5.6: Should this be identified by global rules as language information? If not, we should explain why in the language information data category section. FS: The current definition 6.7.1. says "The element langRule is used to express that a given piece of content (selected by the attribute langPointer) is used to express language information as defined by [RFC 3066bis]." I would add a note saying "Applying this data category to xml:lang attributes does not make sense since xml:lang is already defined in terms of RFC 3066 or its successor". If that would address your concern, please add it to your comment. I18n: We propose a slight alteration to the above: Applying the langRule data category to xml:lang attributes using global rules is not necessary, since ... 10542 1 ysavourel 2006-07-17 13:57:08 +0000 I'm not sure it's quite right: We don't use the langRule data cat on xml:lang because xml:lang is defined in terms of RFC30666. We don't use langRule on xml:lang because xml:lang is already the standard way to specify languages (regardless how it expresses that information). So I would add something like: "The element langRule is used to express that a given piece of content (selected by the attribute langPointer) is used to express language information as defined by [RFC 3066bis]. Note: Applying the langRule data category to xml:lang attributes using global rules is not necessary because xml:lang is the standard way to specify languages." 10746 2 fsasaki 2006-07-25 05:14:04 +0000 I18NCORE comment. Discussed at http://www.w3.org/2006/07/17-i18nits-minutes.html#item03 http://www.w3.org/2006/07/21-i18nits-minutes.html#item03 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its/2006JulSep/0162.html Action: working group to discuss http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its/2006JulSep/0162.html . 10913 3 fsasaki 2006-08-01 01:13:56 +0000 Discussed at http://www.w3.org/2006/07/31-i18nits-minutes.html#item04 . Resolution: Agreed to go back to i18n core with the proposals at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its/2006JulSep/0121.html and http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its/2006JulSep/0162.html . We say that processing of xml:lang is not a normative requirement for an ITS implementation. This resolution should resolve the bugs 3468, 3469, 3480 and 3515. 11475 4 fsasaki 2006-09-07 04:02:08 +0000 Action: editors to make the change and Felix to go back to i18n core. 11597 5 fsasaki 2006-09-11 03:54:10 +0000 Wait: response sent. See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its/2006JulSep/0333.html 11748 6 ysavourel 2006-09-14 20:14:21 +0000 Closed. Commenters satisfied see: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its/2006JulSep/0362.html 12133 7 fsasaki 2006-09-28 06:28:25 +0000 Summary: The Working Group decided to accept the proposal and to clarify the role of xml:lang for the "language information" data category.