How could RDDL be internationalised?

[Tony Coates <Tony.Coates@reuters.com>]

Just looking through the RDDL spec today, I wonder if internationalisation
(i-eighteen-n) was considered.  That is to say, I would want to be able to give
a single resource multiple names in multiple languages.  Yes, I could add each
name as though it were a separate resource, but I'm sure no-one would really
want to suggest that as a serious option.  I could add RDF or a topic map to the
RDDL to define the language mappings, but that would bog it down too, wouldn't
it??

Would people be agreeable to a modified RDDL spec that allows one resource to
have multiple descriptions (whether or not they are in different languages?).  I
might even tentatively suggest

<!ELEMENT rddl:description (#PCDATA | %Flow.mix;)*>
<!ATTLIST rddl:description
  xml:lang NMTOKEN #IMPLIED
  >

<!ELEMENT rddl:resource (rddl:description)*>
<!ATTLIST rddl:resource
  id ID #IMPLIED
  xml:lang NMTOKEN #IMPLIED
  xml:base CDATA #IMPLIED
  xmlns:rddl   CDATA #FIXED 'http://www.rddl.org/'
  xlink:type   (simple|extended|arc|locator|resource)   #FIXED "simple"
  xlink:arcrole CDATA         #IMPLIED
  xlink:role   CDATA          "http://www.rddl.org/#resource"
  xlink:href   CDATA          #IMPLIED
  xlink:title  CDATA          #IMPLIED
  xlink:embed  CDATA          #FIXED "none"
  xlink:actuate     CDATA          #FIXED "none"
  >

I have left the "xml:lang" attribute on "rddl:resource" with the thought that it
might usefully describe the language of the resource (rather than the
description), but I rather assume that would actually be an abusive overloading
of the semantics of "xml:lang".  If it is an abuse, I would remove "xml:lang"
from "rddl:resource" (in as much as it can be removed).

     Cheers,
          Tony.
========
Anthony B. Coates
Leader of XML Architecture & Design
Chief Technology Office
Reuters Plc, London.
tony.coates@reuters.com
========


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

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.