language

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Michael, Jun 20, 2011.

  1. Michael

    Michael Guest

    Hi
    how to automatically use different languages alike winehq.org etc.?
    Many thanks
    Michael
     
    Michael, Jun 20, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. 2011-06-20 13:36, Michael wrote:

    > how to automatically use different languages alike winehq.org etc.?


    By imitating what they do.

    But it's better not to do things that way.

    Look at the page http://www.winehq.org and suppose that all Latin letter
    are Greek... Hebrew... well, just _very odd_ to you. What would you do?

    (Incidentally, I just a had a nice lunch conversation with my wife,
    recollecting memories from our trip to Israel. We couldn't instruct a
    taxi driver take us to a place we wanted, even by showing it on the map,
    as the map texts were in those odd Latin letters - we have to proceed so
    that she read names on the map aloud... I also remember when I first
    tried to draw cash using an ATM where the initial display had Hebrew
    letters only. And it was just a lucky guess, rather than my limited
    understanding of the letters, that took me to a version of the user
    interface in English. And I do remember the printed statement about
    "royal bitch" in my credit card balance after using an ATM at the Royal
    Beach hotel, but I digress.)

    You might get the idea if you select the Hebrew language (I guess you
    can guess what option it is), then consider what you would do if that
    were the first page you encountered. (I'm assuming that you don't know
    Hebrew. Try "Polski" if you do. If you know both languages, I'm sure you
    realized what the problem is!)

    The first point is that in a multilingual site, the main page
    (corresponding directly to the server address) should contain
    _something_ understandable in one's own language, if that language is
    among the supported languages. A splash page of language selection, with
    each language indicate in the language herself, is not ideal but surely
    not the worst option.

    The second point to learn is that a menu of languages should be a menu
    of languages, not a menu of countries, still less a menu with distorted,
    even insulting versions of country flags.

    Apart from the bad use of flags, the page http://www.winehq.org/lang is
    not too bad. And it's just a list of links, as it should be. You might
    ask why it misspells "Current Langage" and "la Lengua" (Spanish uses no
    such capitalization), but the answer is that people just don't take
    these things seriously. At least the top level pages are left to
    semialphabetic nerds.

    And, of course, there is no true localization, as usual. If you select
    the Spanish (Español) version, you'll see that most, if not all, pages
    are served in English. It's often OK to user English as fallback, but
    hardly ever OK to do so without warning. Any accidental-looking change
    of language is suspicious, or should be.


    --
    Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
     
    Jukka K. Korpela, Jun 20, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. 2011-06-20 14:50, Sherm Pendley wrote:

    > "Jukka K. Korpela"<> writes:
    >
    >> might ask why it misspells "Current Langage" and "la Lengua" (Spanish
    >> uses no such capitalization), but the answer is that people just don't
    >> take these things seriously.

    >
    > Beware of over-generalized assumptions...


    I think you just confirmed my point. :)

    >> It's often OK to user [sic] English as fallback

    >
    > ... because sometimes, even people who *do* take such things seriously
    > still fall prey to the occasional typo. :)


    I do take localization seriously, but sometimes not seriously enough. My
    typo, though a stupid one, is hopefully excusable in an informal
    discussion like this Usenet group. On the front page of a web site, or
    on the language selection page of a multilingual site, no excuses should
    be accepted. It should not depend on the carefulness of a single person
    or his mood.

    --
    Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
     
    Jukka K. Korpela, Jun 20, 2011
    #3
  4. Michael

    Dan Guest

    On Jun 20, 6:36 am, Michael <> wrote:
    >   how to automatically use different languages alike winehq.org etc.?


    I have some comments on this topic here:

    http://webtips.dan.info/language.html
     
    Dan, Jun 21, 2011
    #4
  5. Tue, 21 Jun 2011 11:31:01 -0700 (PDT), /Dan/:
    > On Jun 20, 6:36 am, Michael<> wrote:
    >
    >> how to automatically use different languages alike winehq.org etc.?

    >
    > I have some comments on this topic here:
    >
    > http://webtips.dan.info/language.html


    As far as I'm aware: "The Content-Language entity-header field
    describes the natural language(s) of the intended audience for the
    enclosed entity. Note that this might not be equivalent to all the
    languages used within the entity-body."
    <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2616#section-14.12>:

    > ... The primary purpose of
    > Content-Language is to allow a user to identify and differentiate
    > entities according to the user's own preferred language. Thus, if the
    > body content is intended only for a Danish-literate audience, the
    > appropriate field is
    >
    > Content-Language: da
    >
    > If no Content-Language is specified, the default is that the content
    > is intended for all language audiences. This might mean that the
    > sender does not consider it to be specific to any natural language,
    > or that the sender does not know for which language it is intended.
    >
    > Multiple languages MAY be listed for content that is intended for
    > multiple audiences. For example, a rendition of the "Treaty of
    > Waitangi," presented simultaneously in the original Maori and English
    > versions, would call for
    >
    > Content-Language: mi, en
    >
    > However, just because multiple languages are present within an entity
    > does not mean that it is intended for multiple linguistic audiences.
    > An example would be a beginner's language primer, such as "A First
    > Lesson in Latin," which is clearly intended to be used by an
    > English-literate audience. In this case, the Content-Language would
    > properly only include "en".


    So 'Content-Language' is not appropriate for specifying the language
    of the content as specifying:

    Content-Language: en

    would mean: "intended only for native English speakers", while I not
    being native English speaker could read English well enough to be
    appropriate audience for the content.

    I'm not really fond of the current 'Content-Language' intention as I
    find it quite useless compared to the use of specifying the language
    of the entity, but that's what has been really specified.

    --
    Stanimir
     
    Stanimir Stamenkov, Jun 21, 2011
    #5
  6. 2011-06-22 1:43, Stanimir Stamenkov wrote:

    > "The Content-Language entity-header field describes
    > the natural language(s) of the intended audience for the enclosed
    > entity.


    That's a sloppy wording in the HTTP protocol, and it gets worse:

    >> ... The primary purpose of
    >> Content-Language is to allow a user to identify and differentiate
    >> entities according to the user's own preferred language.


    It may sound like it referred to the native language. But in the next
    statement, the idea is completely different:

    >> Thus, if the
    >> body content is intended only for a Danish-literate audience, the
    >> appropriate field is
    >>
    >> Content-Language: da


    Being "Danish-literate" is surely not the same thing as having Danish as
    the native language. In fact, what the protocol means to say is obscure
    but probably different from both of these. The Content-Language header
    is not restricted to text documents. It could accompany a resource
    consisting of recorded speech. I consider myself as fairly
    "Danish-literate" but I understand very little of _spoken_ Danish.

    > So 'Content-Language' is not appropriate for specifying the language of
    > the content as specifying:
    >
    > Content-Language: en
    >
    > would mean: "intended only for native English speakers",


    No, it does not mean that. The HTTP protocol just describes the header
    poorly. What it wants to say, more or less, applied to this particular
    case, is that the header informs that the resource is intended for
    people who understand English, in some vague sense.

    (It is hard to imagine a resource that would only be intended to
    _native_ speakers of a language. I have met many people who have learned
    Finnish as second language and speak it better than most native speakers.)

    The HTML 4.01 specification explicitly says that in the absence of lang
    attributes, the Content-Language header, if present, is to be taken as
    specifying the language of the document.

    > I'm not really fond of the current 'Content-Language' intention as I
    > find it quite useless compared to the use of specifying the language of
    > the entity, but that's what has been really specified.


    The topic is rather theoretical, because the Content-Language header is
    used very little if at all by software that _could_ use it. (Apache
    content negotiation uses Content-Language lines in configuration files,
    but they are not HTTP headers as such - though they may cause such
    headers to be sent, but with no practical impact.)

    --
    Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
     
    Jukka K. Korpela, Jun 22, 2011
    #6
  7. Wed, 22 Jun 2011 08:47:06 +0300, /Jukka K. Korpela/:
    > 2011-06-22 1:43, Stanimir Stamenkov wrote:
    >
    >> "The Content-Language entity-header field describes
    >> the natural language(s) of the intended audience for the enclosed
    >> entity.

    >
    > That's a sloppy wording in the HTTP protocol, and it gets worse:
    > [...]
    >> Content-Language: en
    >>
    >> would mean: "intended only for native English speakers",

    >
    > No, it does not mean that. The HTTP protocol just describes the
    > header poorly. What it wants to say, more or less, applied to this
    > particular case, is that the header informs that the resource is
    > intended for people who understand English, in some vague sense.


    So, is it correct to say specifying:

    Content-Language: <LN>

    where <LN> is a two-letter language code, is always appropriate for
    a content mainly written in the given language?

    --
    Stanimir
     
    Stanimir Stamenkov, Jun 22, 2011
    #7
  8. 2011-06-23 0:35, Stanimir Stamenkov wrote:

    > So, is it correct to say specifying:
    >
    > Content-Language: <LN>
    >
    > where <LN> is a two-letter language code, is always appropriate for a
    > content mainly written in the given language?


    That's the general idea, though it's not particularly _useful_ to do so.
    On the top of my head, I can't figure out _any_ impact it could have,
    except as documentation to a person who looks at the headers sent by the
    server (e.g., using Web Developer Extension on Firefox - it's useful
    even if you aren't a developer) and knows the meaning of this header.

    But trying hard, one might find a counterexample. Imagine a document
    consisting of 95% Etruscan texts and 5% notes in German, with the
    purpose of testing that a font containing Etruscan letters is available
    and has acceptable characteristics. The notes in German would explain
    how to judge the acceptability, as well as tell the purpose, give
    references, etc. So the reader is expected to know German, but he does
    not need to know Etruscan. Then the correct value for Content-Language
    would be "de". But in markup, it could well have <html lang="ett">, just
    overriding this with lang="de" for the pieces that are in German.

    --
    Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
     
    Jukka K. Korpela, Jun 23, 2011
    #8
  9. Michael

    Brian Cryer Guest

    "Qruqs" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 19:53:50 +0300, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:

    <snip>

    Whilst your comment is valid, are you aware that you are replying to a post
    which is over a year old?

    I suspect you are posting via a forum and are not aware that this is a poor
    front end to a newsgroup. Do yourself a favour and get a newsgroup reader
    and then look at the current discussions on alt.html.
    --
    Brian Cryer
    http://www.cryer.co.uk/brian
     
    Brian Cryer, Jun 27, 2012
    #9
  10. Qruqs wrote:
    > On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 19:53:50 +0300, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:

    ^^^^^^^
    Why are you replying to 1-year-old posts?

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
     
    Jonathan N. Little, Jun 27, 2012
    #10
  11. Michael

    Scott Bryce Guest

    On 6/27/2012 12:50 AM, Qruqs wrote:
    > And of course you also warn the user that cookies are used, and that
    > they should not empty their cookie-jar if they want to keep the
    > language setting in the future. :)


    Or not. I suspect on a well-designed site selecting your preferred
    language is not an overly burdensome task.
     
    Scott Bryce, Jul 2, 2012
    #11
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Ed
    Replies:
    24
    Views:
    1,076
    Dimitri Maziuk
    Mar 27, 2006
  2. DaveInSidney
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    469
    DaveInSidney
    May 9, 2005
  3. pabbu
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    773
    Marc Boyer
    Nov 7, 2005
  4. Shravani
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    828
    Bartc
    Mar 16, 2008
  5. Replies:
    28
    Views:
    1,218
Loading...

Share This Page