Tex's -08 comments

[Misha Wolf]

Doug Ewell wrote:

> I don't believe the null string is a valid language tag, or should be.
> I think protocols that allow it, such as XML, should specify that the
> null string is allowable *in place of* a language tag.

The XML 1.1 spec says:

The intent declared with xml:lang is considered to apply to all
attributes and content of the element where it is specified, unless
overridden with an instance of xml:lang on another element within that
content. In particular, the empty value of xml:lang is used on an
element B to override a specification of xml:lang on an enclosing
element A, without specifying another language. Within B, it is
considered that there is no language information available, just as if
xml:lang had not been specified on B or any of its ancestors. 

http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xml11-20040204/#sec-lang-tag

Misha
 





--------------------------------------------------------------- -
        Visit our Internet site at http://www.reuters.com

Get closer to the financial markets with Reuters Messaging - for more
information and to register, visit http://www.reuters.com/messaging

Any views expressed in this message are those of  the  individual
sender,  except  where  the sender specifically states them to be
the views of Reuters Ltd.