At 2007-10-18 14:44 +0200, bryan rasmussen wrote:
>It seems to me that people are always reinventing the wheel where
>xml:lang is used and I am always seeing standards that specify an
>attribute or element usage for specifying the language that parts of a
>document are in. Can anyone think of any particular formats or perhaps
>governmental initiatives where it has been officially decreed that
>xml:lang must be used when appropriate, and does anyone know why
>people seem to not use xml:lang in favor of using other ways to do the
>same thing?
My customers using DITA are using xml:lang for their product
documentation. The stylesheets I write for them inspect the document
element for the language in order to arrange the page geometry appropriately.
Personally I'm using it in subtrees of multi-lingual compilations of
Universal Business Language information item description
translations: the aggregate translation stores for each item
description the many available language translations, each annotated
with an appropriate xml:lang.
Where are you seeing alternatives popping up?
. . . . . . . . . . . . . Ken
--
Comprehensive in-depth XSLT2/XSL-FO1.1 classes: Austin TX,Jan-2008
World-wide corporate, govt. & user group XML, XSL and UBL training
RSS feeds: publicly-available developer resources and training
G. Ken Holman mailto:
Crane Softwrights Ltd. http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/x/
Box 266, Kars, Ontario CANADA K0A-2E0 +1(613)489-0999 (F:-0995)
Male Cancer Awareness Jul'07 http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/x/bc
Legal business disclaimers: http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal
