RFC 3066

[xyzzy]

Please update RFC 3066 (2001) by 5646 (2009) skipping 4646 (2006).
You could also use BCP 47, as that covered RFC 3066 / 4646 / 5646 when
they were state of the art.

I stumbled over this nit, because I found a detailed W3C example
Opensearch Description with a <Language> element and the Opensearch
references in HTML5 drafts.

Maybe -- not sure -- the draft should say something about xml:lang vs.
<Language>. So far I use only xml:lang, no <Language>.

And because my use cases produce no feeds I never use
<SyndicationRight>, I hope that is as it should be.

[xyzzy]

> because my use cases produce no feeds I never use
> <SyndicationRight>, I hope that is as it should be.

Or maybe not, the Google CSE API can get JSON for a "free" CSE.
Presumably it can also get XML even if that's not intended for "free"
CSEs, and then <SyndicationRight> might be relevant. You can play
with the API and OpenSearch descriptions for "custom search engines"
at <https://code.google.com/apis/explorer/>

[DeWitt Clinton]

Responses inline.

On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 9:53 PM, xyzzy <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdt...@gmail.com> wrote:

Please update RFC 3066 (2001) by 5646 (2009) skipping 4646 (2006).
You could also use BCP 47, as that covered RFC 3066 / 4646 / 5646 when
they were state of the art.

Good catch.  I've created Draft 5 (currently not linked to from the opensearch.org homepage) and made the recommended change from RFC 3066 to RFC 5646.

Please verify at:

  http://www.opensearch.org/Specifications/OpenSearch/1.1/Draft_5

I stumbled over this nit, because I found a detailed W3C example
Opensearch Description with a <Language> element and the Opensearch
references in HTML5 drafts.

Maybe -- not sure -- the draft should say something about xml:lang vs.
<Language>.  So far I use only xml:lang, no <Language>.

I've always understood xml:lang to describe the contents of the XML document itself, whereas <Language> describes the content and capabilities of the search engine being referred to.  They appear to serve distinct purposes, if I'm understanding correctly.   Is there some clarifying text that you think we should include to help ensure this doesn't trip anyone up?

And because my use cases produce no feeds I never use
<SyndicationRight>, I hope that is as it should be.

Agreed.  This is a vestigial appendage, hearkening back to the A9.com / re-syndicator roots of the description format.  If we ever do a complete overhaul of the format, I might recommend we drop this.

Much obliged,

-DeWitt

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenSearch" group.
To post to this group, send email to opens...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to opensearch+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/opensearch?hl=en.

[xyzzy]

On Mar 11, 8:10 pm, DeWitt Clinton <dclin...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Please verify at:
>  http://www.opensearch.org/Specifications/OpenSearch/1.1/Draft_5

Good, and looking again at it I think the "language" business is
clear:
None of my OpenSearch descriptions support to restrict the language of
search results, therefore the default "*" is good enough.

I enforce "hl=en" in one case, and my descriptions generally use en-GB
(or similar) for keywords etc., but that does not affect the search
results.

You could still mention xml:lang somewhere as optional attribute for
all elements where this makes sense, notably the root element of any
OpenSearch description:

A given description normally has only one xml:lang, and that might be
xml:lang="en" or xml:lang="de", but certainly not "i-default"... :-)

Like xml:id and similar attributes xml:lang can be used without any
namespace tricks, all XML processors are supposed to know what it is
or ignore it.

> I've always understood xml:lang to describe the contents of the XML
> document itself, whereas <Language> describes the content and
> capabilities of the search engine being referred to.

Yes, you are right, actually you can attach xml:lang to any element,
it then covers all attributes and enclosed elements without another
specific xml:lang. Unrelated to the <Language> element, as you said.

Thanks, Frank