I agree with Ross that this is not a Bibframe specific issue.Both of the pieces of sample code use MARC-XML, which, in order to be standard, must use unicode (see [log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask] ).
RDF Literals that are textual can be marked for language/dialect, etc. Doing so indicates that the text so marked should be interpreted as being in the given language. This has precisely the same semantics as the standard "lang" attribute. Currently, RDF PlainLiterals allow the language tag to be unspecified.
HTML and xml lang attributes apply only to text and elements enclosed by the element bearing the attribute; this attribute value can be overridden by enclosed elements.If the language for which a literal is a text is unknown, it need not be stated.
---The language of the text that is used to describe something that is, or bears, information in a language may be unrelated to the language of the described object. For example, a copy of an English language translation of a work originally written in French, held in a Mexican library, might have a description which includes a Spanish language summary.---
If a language has a ISO-639-1 two letter code then that code is registered, per BCP-47.If a language has both an ISO-639-2 B and an ISO-639-2 T code defined, then only the T code is registered per BCP-47.Every language that has a two letter code and a three letter code, then only the two letter code is registered.Every language that has a distinct B and T 3-letter code also has a two letter code.