Hello Mark, > Regarding hreflang - looking through the history, it's been discussed > in a fairly positive light a few times, but never made it in. I think > it does make some sense, since it's both in Atom and HTML.
I think hreflang would be useful to add. You might want to consider calling it just 'lang', since that locution is more familiar. I think you might want to make it more than a single language tag. The purpose of http-link-header is to provide metadata about a link in addition to the URI. This is more like providing the author's intended target audience rather than the document processing language. That is, it's like the Content-Language header and/or <meta> element, rather than like the <html> lang attribute. Cf. http://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-http-and-lang#answer > I'm a bit > concerned about what the appropriate reference is for the value space; > ATM I'm thinking BCP47 directly, rather than to a specific RFC, to > allow it to evolve*. Although there is a new RFC-to-be (4646bis) now in the RFC-editor's pipeline, I rather think that future changes to BCP 47 will tend to be limited to the production of extensions defined by 4646/4646bis, rather than changes to the grammar of language tags. There are some people who think that a revision might happen to use some reserved subtags for ISO 639-6 if/when that standard reaches maturity, so the possibility of revision does remain. > ... > * Often, a reference to an RFC is preferable, so that software can be > reliably written to a specific set of identifiers. My initial feeling > is that here that's not appropriate to do that, because language tags > are labels, not something that you're going to hardcode into > infrastructure software. Feedback appreciated, especially from the > i18n community. Language tags are, as you note, labels that should not be hardcoded into infrastructure. However, BCP 47 defines the grammar for language tags themselves. Implementers need a reference to determine if the list of language tags they generate or receive is well-formed or not. That might be a good reason for a specific reference. Otherwise, I tend to recommend that people reference BCP 47 (it avoids that old chestnut "RFC WXYZ or its successor"). Best Regards, Addison Addison Phillips Globalization Architect -- Lab126 Chair -- W3C Internationalization WG Internationalization is not a feature. It is an architecture. _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
