[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [dita] Clarification needed on whether xml:lang is required
Hi everyone, I took an action item to propose clearer wording for the spec. Here is my attempt: Page 78 of the CD02 draft spec for DITA 1.2 says: "Applications should ensure that every highest level topic element explicitly assigns the @xml:lang attribute. Authors are urged to set the @xml:lang attribute in the source language so that the translator may change it in the target language. Because some translation software does not permite translators to add elements, the absence of the @xml:lang element from the source language may result in higher administrative costs for translation." I propose replacing this with: "The @xml:lang attribute should be set explicitly at the root of each top-level topic, as DITA processors are not required to support any other way for users to specify the language of topic content. To facilitate the translation process, use of the xml:lang attribute is recommended even if the topic is in the same language as the processor default, because some translation software makes it easier to change an existing attribute value than to add a new one." I suppose that as a spec is not a user guide, we could even do without the second sentence, but I think it's useful. Su-Laine -----Original Message----- From: Su-Laine Yeo [mailto:su-laine.yeo@justsystems.com] Sent: Friday, August 06, 2010 2:42 PM To: dita@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [dita] Clarification needed on whether xml:lang is required Hi everyone, Page 78 of the CD02 draft spec for DITA 1.2 says, "Applications should ensure that every highest level topic element explicitly assigns the @xml:lang attribute." An application could ensure that xml:lang attribute is explicitly assigned, however this would make it out of compliance with the language reference which says that xml:lang is not a required attribute for topics. Currently the spec seems to be saying "applications should treat xml:lang as being required" in one place, and "applications should treat xml:lang as being not required" in another place. Can we remove this sentence from page 78 to remove the contradiction? I think our intention to encourage use of xml:lang is fulfilled in the next sentence which says, "Authors are urged to set the @xml:lang attribute in the source language so that the translator may change it in the target language." Applications can provide defaults and warnings to make it easier for authors to remember to do this. Su-Laine Su-Laine Yeo Solutions Consultant JustSystems Canada, Inc. Office: 778-327-6356 syeo@justsystems.com www.justsystems.com XMetaL Community Forums: http://forums.xmetal.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]