Re: PaceSimpleLanguageTagging status

[Martin Duerst]

(BHello Bjoern,
(B
(BFor more details, please see my earlier message at
(Bhttp://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/msg12198.html.
(BPlease comment on the specific points mentioned there.
(B
(BRegards,     Martin.
(B
(BAt 16:15 05/01/25, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
(B >
(B >* Martin Duerst wrote:
(B >> >> Not yet taken up by the WG, depends on the discussion that comes with
(B >>this call. Same rules as all the others: there has to be a positive WG
(B >>consensus that each adds to the base specification.  -Tim
(B >> >
(B >> >+1, at least for atom:language inside the header. For elements, well,
(B >>there _are_ use cases for elements in different languages, so, since it is
(B >>optional, +1 again.
(B >>
(B >>-1, or better, -2. Inventing things like atom:language when there
(B >>is xml:lang is just completely useless and superfluous.
(B >
(B >Could you clarify how xml:lang solves the problems stated in the Pace?
(B >The alternatives to the Pace would seem to be either restrict xml:lang
(B >to specific elements or implementations that lose xml:lang information
(B >or, in an authoring scenario, do not allow to use it -- i.e., ignoring
(B >the problem in the specification. Neither of which is really helped by
(B >xml:lang, so your comment seems a bit weird.
(B >--
(B >Bj$B�S(Bn H$B�I(Brmann $B%-(B mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] $B%-(B http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
(B >Weinh. Str. 22 $B%-(B Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 $B%-(B http://www.bjoernsworld.de
(B >68309 Mannheim $B%-(B PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 $B%-(B http://www.websitedev.de/