I am responding to just clarify the use of language tags in EAC-CPF. Actually there are two different attributes that address two different language tagging needs: @languageCode and @xml:lang. We have clarified this in the Tag Library (the 2014 edition <http://eac.staatsbibliothek-berlin.de/fileadmin/user_upload/schema/cpfTagLibrary.html>

I am referring here below to the same Tag Library:

@languageCode must occur only <language> (which itself occurs within <languageDeclaration> and <languageUsed> to indicate “The specification of a particular language used in the EAC-CPF instance or in the creative work of the CPF entity being described” (quotation from the EAC-CPF Tag Library http://eac.staatsbibliothek-berlin.de/fileadmin/user_upload/schema/cpfTagLibrary.html#language) The content of the languageCode attribute must be given in the form of valid code from ISO 639-2b.
I think this addresses your concern, if I am not mistaken.

On the other hand, it is with @xml:langthat the two-letter language codes from the IANA registry are used as dictated by the W3C specification for this. And this attribute is used to indicate the language of the text contained within any of the elements whenever necessary. Kerstin has requested that this is applicable to each and every element that contains text in order to address the multilingualism needs. This is one of the issues to be dealt with this year.
(from the EAC-CPF Tag Library:
Description:
The xml:lang may occur on any element intended to contain natural language content whenever information about the language of the content of this element and its children are needed. xml:lang should be used when the language of the element differs from the Language Code declared in the languageCode attribute on the element <language> within the <control> element. The values in the list are taken from the IANA Registry (http://www.iana.org/assignments/language-subtag-registry). The use of the IANA Registry code for languages in this context is outlined in the W3C specification. The syntax is specified at: http://www.w3.org/International/articles/language-tags/.
Datatype:
IANA Registry for language codes.)

I apologize if all this is already very clear to you. As for aligning EAC-CPF with EAD3 (that is use @lang instead of xml:lang) this is already among the issues discussed, but at the moment EAC-CPF was created, the decision was taken to use @xml:lang as an attribute name belonging to the xml namespace. Terry Catapano or any other person from the SDT might probably feel the need to make additional comments.

Best regards

Anila Angjeli
Co-chair of the TS EAC-CPF

Bibliothèque nationale de France
Département  Information bibliographique et numérique (IBN)
Quai François Mauriac
F-75706 Paris cedex 13
Tél.: 33.(0)1.5379.5395
[log in to unmask]

ISNI 0000 0004 2755 4724

Message de : Go Sugimoto <[log in to unmask]>                     11/12/2014 11:35 Envoyé par : Encoded Archival Description List <[log in to unmask]> Veuillez répondre à Encoded Archival Description List <[log in to unmask]> Pour [log in to unmask] Copie Objet Re: EAC-CPF and xml:lang

Dear folks,

Regarding my previous post about EAC-CPF and @xml:lang, I have only exchanged personal emails with a few colleagues who work on EAD3. They echo more or less my concerns, as they refer to the alignment with EAD3 which does not use @xml:lang and instead use @lang as a local attribute.
This is exactly what I think for EAC-CPF too. In my opinion, the easiest and best solution would be to use @langaugeCode (ISO639-2 recommended) for all levels, if @xml:lang is not a prerequisite.

If this is a kind of change EAC-CPF will make, it would be highly appreciated if somebody (especially from the EAC-CPF committee) to verify it. Personally I think it best if the change will be announced asap, as we can avoid producing more EAC-CPF in a different way (this is very true for our project in Europe).

Thanks again, and look forward to hearing from you.

All the best,
*************************************************
Go Sugimoto
APEx project / National Archives of the Netherlands
[log in to unmask]  

APEx project http://www.apex-project.eu  
Archives Portal Europe http://www.archivesportaleurope.net      
*************************************************

-----Original Message-----
From: Encoded Archival Description List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of EAD automatic digest system
Sent: vrijdag 5 december 2014 6:01
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: EAD Digest - 2 Dec 2014 to 4 Dec 2014 (#2014-119)

There is 1 message totalling 34 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

 1. EAC-CPF and xml:lang

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 4 Dec 2014 13:59:19 +0000
From:    Go Sugimoto <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: EAC-CPF and xml:lang

Dear colleagues,

I have a question for EAC-CPF.
I am really new here, so sorry if my question is already discussed, or my i= nformation is not correct etc, please correct me.=20

I am in the standard group in APEx project and heard from my colleagues tha= t the new version of EAC-CPF will deploy ISO639-2 for @xml:lang. Is it true= ? If so, what is the reason behind it?

I understand that some people (including APEx) have talked about the proble= m of inconsistency between @xml:lang (IANA) and @languageCode (ISO639-2), a= nd I agree to be consistent one way or the other. But, @xml:lang is an exte= rnal attribute from W3C, and it should be IANA compliant for global interop= erability, in my opinion. If ISO639-2 is used, it allows @xml:lang=3Deng, w= hich I think strange (normally @xml:lang=3Den). I am not arguing what is ne= eded for archives (availability of languages etc), but only talking about t= he syntax for this particular question.

Can somebody clarify the latest situation of the two attributes? Thank you.

Best Regards,
Go Sugimoto
The National Archives of The Netherlands, APEx project

------------------------------

End of EAD Digest - 2 Dec 2014 to 4 Dec 2014 (#2014-119)
********************************************************