RE: [dita-translation] Proposal- xml:lang attribute

Forgive me if this has been discussed before -- I've been swamped and
have not been able to keep up with the discussion -- but I have a
question about the xml:lang recommended usage. I recall a presentation
to the DITA TC -- by Andrzej, perhaps? -- that said use of xml:lang
should be minimized. On the other hand, this proposal recommends that
xml:lang always be set. I'm not familiar with the arguments pro or con,
but could someone reconcile the two positions?

To say that xml:lang should be set for a document element in the DITA
context needs refinement. It is possible for a valid DITA document to
have <dita> as the root element. This is merely an aggregation element
with no output semantics: topics are pulled in using maps, not <dita>.
So setting xml:lang for the <dita> element would be meaningless at best.


There is a proposal to make %univ-atts; truly universal in DITA 1.1, so
xml:lang can end up anywhere.
- Would xml:lang in topicref override the language setting in the
referred-to language?
- Can we safely ignore xml:lang in <dita>?

Chris


-----Original Message-----
From: Gershon L Joseph [mailto:] 
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:20 AM
To: ; ;
; ; ; 'Richard Ishida';
; 'Lieske, Christian'; 'Jennifer
Linton'; 'Munshi, Sukumar'; 'Charles Pau'; ; 'Reynolds,
Peter'; 'Felix Sasaki'; 'Yves Savourel'; 'Dave A Schell'; 'Bryan
Schnabel'
Subject: [dita-translation] Proposal- xml:lang attribute

Hi all,

Please review my updated proposal. I've added best practice sections for
users and vendors/implementers.

We would like to finalize and approve our xml:lang proposal for
submission to the DITA TC during Monday's SC meeting. Please post your
feedback to the list.

Thanks,
Gershon

---
Gershon L Joseph
Member, OASIS DITA and DocBook Technical Committees Director of
Technology and Single Sourcing Tech-Tav Documentation Ltd.
office: +972-8-974-1569
mobile: +972-57-314-1170
http://www.tech-tav.com