Tuesday, January 18, 2005, 6:56:28 AM, you wrote:
> At 17:47 05/01/17, David Powell wrote:
>>Reading the XML spec, I'm not clear that we're allowed to restrict the
>>inheritance of xml:lang?
>>
> From this text, it is indeed not clear. There is an erratum that
> makes this clearer. Please
At 05:16 05/01/18, David Powell wrote:
>
>
>Monday, January 17, 2005, 7:32:48 PM, you wrote:
>
>> There are some fields in Atom which are "language-independent" or
>> "neutral" and thus it might be useful to explicitly prevent the use of
>> xml:lang tags for these elements or simply state t
At 05:15 05/01/18, David Powell wrote:
>Monday, January 17, 2005, 6:11:22 PM, you wrote:
>> Suppose Joi Ito wants to list his name in
>> Japanese but still write in English; or the the reverse.
>
>Let's hope he doesn't want to provide a name in more than one language.
Well, I can definitely imagine
At 17:47 05/01/17, David Powell wrote:
>Reading the XML spec, I'm not clear that we're allowed to restrict the
>inheritance of xml:lang?
>
>>From the spec:
>
>> The intent declared with xml:lang is considered to apply to all
>> attributes and content of the element where it is specified, unless
>>
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 04:32:49PM -0500, Robert Sayre wrote:
>
> ...
>
> time
>
>
> I think it should be acceptable to return the following:
>
> ...time
I agree. However, given:
--
...
time
---
Tim Bray wrote:
Draft format-04 says "Requirements regarding the content and
interpretation of xml:lang are specified in XML 1.0
[W3C.REC-xml-20040204] Section 2.12." If the element or attribute so
labeled contains free text, xml:lang is relevant. If not, not. If you
don't know (i.e. on som
Monday, January 17, 2005, 7:32:48 PM, you wrote:
> There are some fields in Atom which are "language-independent" or
> "neutral" and thus it might be useful to explicitly prevent the use of
> xml:lang tags for these elements or simply state that they have no meaning
> if used.
It is the
Monday, January 17, 2005, 6:11:22 PM, you wrote:
>> What do you think about only allowing it on atom:content and on Text
>> constructs?
> I'm very concerned. Any time you're processing text and you want to
> display it or index it for search, or do pretty well anything, if you
> don't know wha
Tim Bray wrote:
On Jan 17, 2005, at 10:59 AM, Robert Sayre wrote:
I think David's issue with xml:lang concerns mapping Atom entries to,
say, an RDBMS. I think he feels it will be challenging to store with
that requirement. For instance, what does it mean to include an
xml:lang declaration on ato
David Powell wrote:
> I think that Atom's use of xml:lang is likely to be a significant
> problem to many implementors.
Life is tough! So what?
XML gives us a standard way to flag the language of things. Unless
there is a really compelling argument to do something different, it isn
On Jan 17, 2005, at 11:17 AM, Robert Sayre wrote:
For instance, what does it mean to include an xml:lang declaration
on atom:updated?
Clearly, it means nothing, and such an occurrence can safely be
ignored or discarded. What am I missing? -Tim
Let's say I use an Atom protocol client to PUT an en
Tim Bray wrote:
On Jan 17, 2005, at 10:59 AM, Robert Sayre wrote:
I think David's issue with xml:lang concerns mapping Atom entries to,
say, an RDBMS. I think he feels it will be challenging to store with
that requirement. For instance, what does it mean to include an
xml:lang declaration on ato
On Jan 17, 2005, at 10:59 AM, Robert Sayre wrote:
I think David's issue with xml:lang concerns mapping Atom entries to,
say, an RDBMS. I think he feels it will be challenging to store with
that requirement. For instance, what does it mean to include an
xml:lang declaration on atom:updated?
Clear
Tim Bray wrote:
On Jan 17, 2005, at 12:47 AM, David Powell wrote:
I think that if we allow xml:lang then it should definitely be
restricted. The current "xml:lang everywhere" situation is only simple
to implement if you assume that your implementation stores all of it's
data in an XML DOM.
This st
On Jan 17, 2005, at 12:47 AM, David Powell wrote:
If it turns out that it's really an
issue, couldn't you achieve the desired effect by restricting xml:lang
to appear only on atom:entry and atom:feed?
See my reply to Martin. Restricting the position of xml:lang could
make things worse, unless we a
Monday, January 17, 2005, 5:06:47 AM, you wrote:
> I think this proposal throws out the baby with the bathwater.
> I don't see any reason to introduce an atom:language element;
> xml:lang can serve exactly the same purpose. If you want to
> reduce the effect on performance/DBs, there are the fol
r there is anything in Atom that makes this unnecessarily
>> difficult.
>>
>> I think that Atom's use of xml:lang is likely to be a significant
>> problem to many implementors. I've posted PaceSimpleLanguageTagging
>> explaining the problem.
> I&#
7;s use of xml:lang is likely to be a significant
problem to many implementors. I've posted PaceSimpleLanguageTagging
explaining the problem.
I'm fairly unconvinced that this is will loom very large in the
universe of implementor problems. If it turns out that it's really an
issue,
provide a basis for a mapping Atom to
>models such as RDF [1], ER, and OO. I'm currently doing some work to see
>whether there is anything in Atom that makes this unnecessarily
>difficult.
>
>I think that Atom's use of xml:lang is likely to be a significan
problem to many implementors. I've posted PaceSimpleLanguageTagging
explaining the problem.
http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceSimpleLanguageTagging
[1] RDF supports language tagging of literals, so xml:lang doesn't
actually cause a serious problem for an Atom implementation
20 matches
Mail list logo
