On 10/14/05, Robert Sayre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't understand the second issue being raised here. Could someone try > again?
Robert - sorry, I obviously wasn't very clear. I only wished to bring a single issue to the list's attention, the discrepancy between the wording of the spec on "hreflang", and what I believe to be its intended meaning in particular in terms of one of the cited references (RFC 3986). >4.2.7.4 The "hreflang" Attribute > > The "hreflang" attribute's content describes the language of the > resource pointed to by the href attribute. A resource in the sense of RFC 3986, as far as I can tell, may have multiple representations associated with any number of languages. As far as I'm aware, the only connection between the language(s) and the resource is through the representation(s). This view is reflected in the the other piece of the Atom spec I quoted: >4.2.7.6 The "length" Attribute > > The "length" attribute indicates an advisory length of the linked > content in octets; it is a hint about the content length of the > representation returned when the IRI in the href attribute is mapped > to a URI and dereferenced. >]] Antone - I could be wrong, but I don't think this is a content negotiation issue, simply that the wording munges the resource with its representation(s). I believe this inconsistent with the WebArch conceptual model assumed by the rest of the Atom spec, and actually inconsistent with that other definition inside the spec. Paul - as I understand it the content isn't identical with the resource. This distinction may appear picky, but given that the other definition quoted manages consistency with the referenced specs, it appears to be possible without much extra effort. I must confess I have no idea of the IETF line on where accuracy ends and pickiness begins, or what might be appropriate action under the process - on that I will happily defer to you. I'm afraid I don't know what you are referring here: DA: > >and "the" implies a single language - there may be more than one. > PH: > That's true. And it matches the XML 1.0 spec exactly. Cheers, Danny. -- http://dannyayers.com
