Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen@...> writes:
Brion Vibber wrote:
Shinjiman wrote:
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="XXX" lang="XXX">
The lang (and xml:lang) attribute defined at the HTML tag in some
language is
not correct and it's supposed to not making this value identical to $wgContLanguageCode.
Incorrect; it *is* supposed to be the value of $wgContLanguageCode, as by definition $wgContLanguageCode is the RFC 3066 language code for the
language of
the wiki's content.
A reasonable case might be made that when variant display conversion is
engaged,
the lang attribute should be overridden.
For example there's no such language tag called "simple",
Indeed there's not; that would be "en".
Note that $wgContLanguageCode is not the same as the *domain name* or
*interwiki
identifier*. These are separate issues.
according to ISO639, RFC1766, RFC3066 (R1,R2). Hence for my previous
patch
that submitted to Bug:5790. The main purpose of the patch is adding a new Language Tag Mapping against the user interface language which using the incorrect language tag.
That would be stupid and useless. Instead, use the correct code to begin
with.
-- brion vibber (brion <at> pobox.com)
Hoi, The case for the simple wikipedia is indeed obvious. More problematic is when you want to link a wikipedia that uses a code that will never be accepted as a language code because it is considered a language family. Or a code that is used for another language. Or a language where the code is specific while the wikipedia uses it to indicate a larger language "continuum". Another issue is that language codes are retired; this leads to a different interpretation of the meaning of the ku, fa and several others (this is part of ISO-639-3)
Having meaningful links between the Wikimedia codes for interwikil inks and language codes is not trivial. For WiktionaryZ we are going to standardise on ISO-639-3 and have CLEAR codes that identify languages that are not recognised at present. One consequence is, that the Babel templates will be the ISO-639-3 codes as well.
RFC 3066 indicates to be reserving tags for subsequent revisions of the ISO-639 code. ISO-639-3 clearly states that the codes will not be recycled. It also says that this principle will be maintained for any future revisions of the code. It is therefore safe to use ISO-639-3.
Thanks, GerardM
For this, I think you maybe have some ideas about the language tags attribute mapping, which was previously posted in Bugzilla:5790 (http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5790). I've made a flow chart (http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/attachment.cgi?id=1704&action=view) how to determine the lang attribute to render the texts using the correct font. And also would you like to see my proposed patches for this (http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/attachment.cgi?id=1705&action=view and http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/attachment.cgi?id=1706&action=view) is that have any problems that Brion pointed out those stuffs added are consider to making unsafe to the cache (At this case Brion didn't says *how* it would affecting the cache.) Would you have any opinions regarding to my proposed design, or is there have any problems by running the code? (For this one I've done the test on my local wiki, but haven't got the idea *how* the cache would be affected, which is pointed out by Brion). :)
thanks and regards Shinjiman