On 5/1/06 3:27 PM, "Karl Dubost" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Le 06-05-02 à 03:24, Ryan King a écrit : >> Internationalization in protocols and formats is a big problem. >> Much bigger than microformats. Maybe we'll be able to advance >> things in microformats, even if only a little. >> I'm curious has anyone here had experience with Internationalizing >> a data format or communication protocol? > > Indeed. The only very simple way I see to handle this is at authoring > tool level. If we were making a pile on how XML markup languages are > organized, there will be for layers, with the fundamental one at the > bottom, what I would call the base. > > > Top > value of attributes > attributes > element > content > Bottom > > The only experience I have had so far with a "localized" language is > AppleScript. I'll try to find a reference. Indeed, I had almost forgotten about AppleScript. The problem with AppleScript is that it is actually not that readable/writable (even in English *by* native English readers). AppleScript has a superficial resemblance/reuse of English terms which makes it look a lot easier than it actually is (AppleScript is *very* picky about specific language constructs). This is in stark contrast with the language which inspired it, HyperTalk, which is quite easy to both read and write, and as with natural langauges, provides multiple ways of saying the same thing and having it just work. I don't know if HyperTalk was ever localized. However, to pop-up a level, this is certainly out-of-scope for microformats-discuss (as Ryan so well demonstrated this being a problem far outside the realm of microformats) and thus I suggest that we drop this thread "Language Maps" and add it to the list of "bad topics" on the mailing-lists page. http://microformats.org/wiki/mailing-lists Thanks, Tantek _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
