2009/11/23 Syd Bauman <Syd_Bauman(_at_)brown(_dot_)edu>:
My gut instinct is that it is a less than optimal solution to try to
use namespaces to differentiate natural languages. That's what
xml:lang= is for, after all.
<z>
<canonical>MD</canonical>
<name xml:lang="en">medical doctor</name>
<name xml:lang="fr">médecin</name>
<name xml:lang="zh-TW">...</name>
</z>
I think xml:lang had become another hangover from the days of XML
rendered using CSS, when XLink and XPointer seemed like good ideas
too.
A few years down the line, the usual advice is to avoid xml:lang and
create your own markup (simply @lang for example), or to avoid mixing
languages in the same document all together, splitting them out into
separate documents.
For example, in the above example, you could just have:
<name>medical_doctor</name>
where "medical_doctor" is the key for a lookup into your translations,
which are held in separate files.
--
Andrew Welch
http://andrewjwelch.com
Kernow: http://kernowforsaxon.sf.net/
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail: <mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--~--