Closed sydb closed 10 months ago
I'll slap the LinSIG label here just to make sure that it doesn't escape the group. I'm especially intrigued by the last point.
A quick glancecat wikipedia suggests that i-az is a typo for az or maybe aze
Well, whether a typo or not the correct tag is almost certainly “az-Arab”. But one has to wonder if the point of the example was to demonstrate one of the (26) grandfathered tags, of which 13 start with “i-”, but none of which are for Azerbaijani.
Updated descriptions for the attributes (changes indicated by italics in the first bullet point) and corrected language code in the example.
langUsage/language/@ident
attribute to "which is used to identify the
language documented by this element, and which may be referenced by the global
<att>xml:lang</att>
attribute."langUsage/language/@usage
attribute to "specifies the approximate percentage of the text which uses this language."i-az-Arab
to az-Arab
See PR #2502.
<desc>
for thelangUsage/language/@ident
attribute says “and which is referenced by the global@xml:lang
attribute”. That sort of implied it must be referenced by the@xml:lang
attribute. But surely one can have a document that useslanguage/@ident
but does not use@xml:lang
.<desc>
for thelangUsage/language/@usage
attribute says “specifies the approximate percentage (by volume) of the text which uses this language.”. What does “volume” mean in this context?<language>
includes<language ident="i-az-Arab" …>Azerbaijani in Arabic script</language>
, but I do not thinki-az
is a valid language tag per RFC 5646 (part of BCP 47), and it is not listed in the registry.