[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
The paragraph in my previous posting below was badly worded.
> Note: The existing code "und" is not synonymous with the proposed use of the
> empty string. The "und" code means that the text is in some natural language,
> but we don't know which one; the empty string means that the text is not
> in a natural language.
It should have read:
> Note: The existing code "und" is not synonymous with the proposed use of the
> empty string. The "und" code means that the text is in some natural language,
> but we don't know which one; the empty string is the same as not having
> an xml:lang attribute in scope, and may be used when the text is not
> in any natural language.
In addition, the current Schema for Schemas specifies a pattern facet
for xsd:language that excludes the null string; it is not clear whether
this trumps the prose in Section 3.3.3 or not. The Schema WG will be
asked to clarify its position.
--
John Cowan
jcowan@reutershealth.com
I am a member of a civilization. --David Brin
|
