in progressing the content-language draft (the part of RFC
1766 that wasn't just defining language tags) to Draft
Standard, I need to know about implementations.
I know about the HTTP implementation report, but would like
to know about usage outside of HTTP. (Verification of usage
in HTTP is welcome too!)
All protocols that use 822-like headers welcome - feel free
to forward this request to relevant mailing lists!
- Content-language usage
- Accept-language usage
- With quality factors
- Without quality factors
- Usage of content-language/accept-language in negotiation
Please send to me privately; I will collect, and send the
summary to ietf-languages.
The draft is draft-alvestrand-content-language-02.txt
We are planning an implementation of multi-linguality in our
system. It will probably not be ready until early next year.
At present, I am thinking of implementing the following:
First body part: All languages in sequence in plain text format
2nd to n-1th body part: Each language version as a
different body part
Last body part: All languages in sequence in HTML format with
a table of contents in the beginning with internal links to
the different languages.
Since my investigation showed that all existing mailers
display either the first or the last body part in
multipart/alternative, and completely disregard any
"Content-Language" in choosing which body part to display,
the solution above will ensure that everyone will get the
message in a language they can understand. They will also get
the message in other languages, but the message can be
organised to make it easy to skip the language you do not
And the above format makes it possible for future mailers to
chose to display only the appropriate language version
depending on the user choices.
Jacob Palme <jpalme(_at_)dsv(_dot_)su(_dot_)se> (Stockholm University and KTH)
for more info see URL: http://www.dsv.su.se/jpalme/