Nicolas Krebs wrote:
[snip]
Editorial comments. You could add
- http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/REC-its-20070403/#directionality as
informative references, in Section 5.2
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-snell-atompub-bidi-06#section-5.2
- Why create atom:dir instead of re-use its:dir (in a Rationale section).
- What are the differences between atom:dir and its:dir .
There's no reason to introduce the added complexity of ITS here. I
recognize that it's not a lot of added complexity, but ITS would add the
need to support another new namespace and new MUST-level requirements
that simply aren't needed. Further, Atom bidi does not need the rlo and
lro values to indicate bidi overrides and ITS does not provide a means
of explicitly indicating that no base directionality has been set (e.g.
dir="") which is an important case for feeds aggregating content from
multiple sources.
- James
others references/see also
- the various discussions (including
http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/msg04474.html
http://bitworking.org/news/Not_Invented_Here ) wich leaded/caused
urn:ietf:rfc:4287 http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4287 to:
- create its own xml elements atom:author, atom:published,
atom:summary, and do not re-use dc: elements
- do not create its own lang attribute and allow xml:dir
- my previous mail about this subject/topic
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-international/2006OctDec/0003.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-international/2007AprJun/0017.html
- http://www.w3.org/blog/International/2008/03/26/internationalization_tag_set_interest_gr
http://www.w3.org/International/its/ig/
