Thanks Brian - that's useful info for me leanring this stuff. It sounds like xml:lang in its normal context which is fine.
I guess my point would maybe be that if you are going to bother using xml:lang="fr" to write some information in French, then i'd have thought you could easily write the class names and profiles in French too. So, on a web page, if i write my Country in English and Spanish on my own web site, i'd write : Country : Scotland Pais : Escocia [ rather than Country : Escocia ]. Perhaps there are some use cases that could be pointed at that would make having yet a further technique for specifing class name/profile languages really worth the hassle ( i know there will be cases, i'm talking relative effort ). If another technique were required, then each class name under a given context could be normalized to a single definition (under the namespace for that particular microformat to allow the same class names to be used many times). So if someone writes a classname in French, it gets normalized to the English (or Esperanto, or Klingon - select you preferred PC language) equivalent which is the normalized classname used if some equivalence test was required. This would solve the problem for both humans and machines. steven http://stevenR2.com ---- Steven Livingstone http://stevenR2.com ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: brian suda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: Microformats Discuss <[email protected]> Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 09:38:45 -0500 >xml:lang is already used within each microformat. For those who don't >know, you can mix-and-match language attributes within the same >document. So it is possible to have something like: > ><div class="vcard" xml:lang="en"> > <span class="fn">Brian Suda</span> > <org class="org" xml:lang="fr">Foo Bar</org> ></div> > >The resulting vCard looks something like: > >VCARD:BEGIN >FN;LANG=en:Brian Suda >N;LANG=en:;Suda;Brian;;; >ORG;LANG=fr:Foo Bar >VCARD:END > >Citations will do this as well, have a book written in one language, >publisher be in another country, and the author a third. > >By adding the xml:lang you can specific the language of the text, NOT >the language of the class names or profile. > >-brian > > >Steven Livingstone wrote: >> Why not just specify or xml:lang attribute on the Microformat? >> >> e.g. >> >> <a rel="reference" href="http://www.microformats.org/wiki/hcard-profile"; >> xml:lang="fr"> >> Carte de langue pour hCarte à hCard</a> >> >> <class = "profile" xml:lang="fr"> >> <dl> >> <dt id='nom-et-prenoms' ref='fn'>nom-et-prenoms</dt> >> <dd>Le nom et prenoms</dd> >> <dt id='donne-le-nom' ref='given-name'>donne-le-nom</dt> >> <dd>Donne le nom</dd> >> <dt id='nom-de-famille' ref='family-name'>nom-de-famille</dt> >> <dd>Nom de famille</dd> >> </dl> >> </class> >> >> That way an interpreter could just check the value of this and map the class >> name. >> >> This would allow me to easily have an English, Spanish and French hCard on >> the same page. >> >> ---- >> Steven Livingstone >> http://stevenR2.com >> >> ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- >> From: "Joe Andrieu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Reply-To: Microformats Discuss <[email protected]> >> Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 01:33:51 -0700 >> >> >>>> From: Tantek Çelik Sunday, April 30, 2006 6:56 PM >>>> To: microformats-discuss >>>> Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Microformats vs XML >>>> >>>> On 4/30/06 6:20 PM, "Karl Dubost" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> And your page has class names in English when you are using another >>>>> language. -1 >>>>> >>> [snip] >>> >>>> Thus with microformats, you may use both the standard microformat class >>>> names, AND class names in your own non-English language if you wish: >>>> >>>> <span class="family-name soyad">Çelik</span> >>>> >>>> ("soyad" is Turkish for family-name) >>>> >>>> Whereas with POX markup standards, you are relegated to only using the >>>> element names from the spec. >>>> >>>> <family-name>Çelik</family-name> >>>> >>> The current microformat model is certainly better than POX, but I think it >>> still leaves something to be desired. This approach still requires that >>> everyone uses the Microformats Approved(r) Anglo-biased namespace, even if >>> they get to add their own term to the class. >>> >>> To the extent we can enable other peoples and languages to "own" >>> Microformats and participate as first class citizens, I suggest it would be >>> a Good Thing(tm). Couldn't we allow a mapping of any microformat into any >>> language? This seems to be a simple solution for both humans and computers. >>> >>> If we utilize the microformat attribute I mentioned in my previous email (or >>> simply standardize on a profile mechanism), we could see something like >>> this: >>> >>> <a class="hcarte" >>> microformat="http://www.microformats.org.fr/hcarte-profile";> >>> >>> And in the hcarte-profile, we see something like this (again, apologies for >>> any technical errors): >>> >>> <a rel="reference" href="http://www.microformats.org/wiki/hcard-profile";> >>> Carte de langue pour hCarte à hCard</a> >>> >>> <class = "profile"> >>> <dl> >>> <dt id='nom-et-prenoms' ref='fn'>nom-et-prenoms</dt> >>> <dd>Le nom et prenoms</dd> >>> <dt id='donne-le-nom' ref='given-name'>donne-le-nom</dt> >>> <dd>Donne le nom</dd> >>> <dt id='nom-de-famille' ref='family-name'>nom-de-famille</dt> >>> <dd>Nom de famille</dd> >>> </dl> >>> </class> >>> >>> My apologies for my French, but hopefully it gets the idea across. >>> Initially I wasn't sure if the hCard reference terms should be >>> human-readable, rather than attributes of the dictionary entry. If we are >>> going with the culturally sensitive approach, then I think the profile >>> should be 100% human readable /in the presenting language/. >>> >>> Thus, if a French author/developer discovers the above mentioned >>> microformat, they may simply use it the same way the first user did: >>> >>> <a class=hcarte >>> microformat=http://www.frenchmicroformats.org/hcarte-profile> >>> >>> All without any requirement of seeing or using English except the one >>> reference to hCard in the title of the profile. (And technically that could >>> be cut out). Plus, the elements of the microformat are now semantically >>> relevant to the human author. So, the French soccer-dad who wants to put his >>> daughter's soccer schedule online doesn't have to keep mentally translating >>> between the English hcard class names and his native language. This makes >>> Microformats much easier to use, especially in cultures and countries where >>> English is not quite the standardized "second tongue." >>> >>> Once any microformat profile has been mapped to a language, it is easily >>> language-friendly to anyone using that language, assuming they can find the >>> mapping (another argument for a central registry). >>> >>> I expect some might see this approach as offering the potential for chaos. >>> However, the profile would still be a 1:1 mapping to a well-understood >>> microformat. And if we have a reliable profile mechanism, the automated >>> discovery of the semantic translation would be straightforward. Hence, >>> humans get to use the language they want and computers get clean semantic >>> data. Isn't that what is at the heart of the Microformats approach? >>> >>> Does this make any sense? >>> >>> >>> -j >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Joe Andrieu >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> +1 (805) 705-8651 >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> microformats-discuss mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> microformats-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss >> >> > >_______________________________________________ >microformats-discuss mailing list >[email protected] >http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss > _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
