RE: [dita] Clarification needed on whether xml:lang is required

["Su-Laine Yeo" <su-laine.yeo@justsystems.com>]

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