OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   RE: Summary: xml:lang validity and RFC 1766 refs to outdated codes [long

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]
  • From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@mediaone.net>
  • To: Mike Brown <mbrown@corp.webb.net>, unicode@unicode.org
  • Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 18:03:31 -0400

Mike Brown wrote:

> XML 1.0 says that xml:lang attributes must match production 33 for
> well-formedness -- on that all seem to agree. But XML 1.0's normative
> reference to RFC 1766 and the language of that RFC together *could* imply
> that the 2-letter language code portion of xml:lang values must
> not only be
> 2 ASCII characters, but must also match ISO 639 2-letter language codes in
> order to be valid.

Actually production [34] states that the LangCode is one of:

	ISO639Code | IanaCode | UserCode

> There still remains the unclear issue of whether xml:lang validity really
> should correlate to strict RFC 1766 conformance, down to the selection of
> language codes from ISO 639-1.

You can use IanaCode (prefixed with 'i' | 'I') or UserCode (prefixed with
'x' | 'X'), neither of which have a 2 character limit. All options are

Jonathan Borden
The Open Healthcare Group


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS