[tei-council] comments on edw90

[Christian Wittern]

James Cummings <James.Cummings at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk> writes:

> Lou Burnard wrote:
>>> Is this something different from xml:lang?  If yes, why do we need it?
>> Good question. I think the general feeling was that it would be
>> helpful to document the use of xml:lang by referring to this
>> datatype, but that may be a mistake.
>
> Just to make sure I'm understanding this...would that datatype then be
> used for validation of @xml:lang's format?  It seems strange to me to
> be using a tei.datatype to validate and/or document use of a non-TEI
> element/attribute. 

In fact, the whole point of using xml:lang and xml:id is to get the
run-of-the-mill validation from generic xml parsers.  And they do make
sure that the xml:lang is formated according to the spec, which I know
since I have been bitten by Saxon hundreds of times.  

As to the documentation aspect, I think we agreed that that is what
<language> is for and the magic relationship between its @xml:id value
and the value of @xml:lang on other elements is used to bring them
together (the socalled Nancy-Hack).


All the best,

Christian

-- 
 Christian Wittern 
 Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University
 47 Higashiogura-cho, Kitashirakawa, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8265, JAPAN