Re: no xml:lang = Weak I18N for entry

[Martin Duerst <duerst@xxxxxx>]

At 13:35 04/06/13 -0400, Bill Kearney wrote:

> > > Especially when they require, or use, different character encodings.
> Putting
> > > japanese text (one of *several* possible encodings) inside an english 
> feed
> > > normally encoded as iso-8859-1 is one example.
> >
> > It is not a good idea to confuse languages and charsets.  (See 5.1 of RFC
> 2130).
>
> If that's what you're assuming I'm doing, you're incorrect.  I'm fully 
> aware of
> the differences between then and their use in XML.

Yes, you are, sorry. But you mentioned both character encoding and
languages very close together, so I wanted to make sure others
don't get confused.

> So it would appear we agree, in broad principle, that having a default 
> language,
> for content, in the spec as being a bad idea.

Yes indeed, great.

Regards,    Martin.