Programmatically determine language of proper names and technical terms

[xfq]

Proposed comment

https://www.w3.org/TR/wcag2ict-22/#applying-sc-3-1-2-language-of-parts-to-non-web-documents-and-software

The human language of each passage or phrase in the [non-web document or software] can be programmatically determined except for proper names, technical terms, words of indeterminate language, and words or phrases that have become part of the vernacular of the immediately surrounding text.

Why are proper names and technical terms exceptions here?

Instructions:

This follows the process at https://w3c.github.io/i18n-activity/guidelines/review-instructions.html

1. Create the review comment you want to propose by replacing the prompts above these instructions, but LEAVE ALL THE INSTRUCTIONS INTACT

2. Add one or more t:... labels. These should use ids from specdev establish a link to that doc.

3. Set a label to identify the spec: this starts with s: followed by the spec's short name. If you are unable to do that, ask a W3C staff contact to help.

4. Ask the i18n WG to review your comment.

5. After discussion with the i18n WG, raise an issue in the repository of the WG that owns the spec. Use the text above these instructions as the starting point for that comment, but add any suggestions that arose from the i18n WG. In the other WG's repo, add an 'i18n-needs-resolution' label to the new issue. If you think any of the participants in layout requirements task force groups would be interested in following the discussion, add also the appropriate i18n-*lreq label(s).

6. Delete the text below that says 'url_for_the_issue_raised', then add in its place the URL for the issue you raised in the other WG's repository. Do NOT remove the initial '§ '. Do NOT use [...](...) notation – you need to delete the placeholder, then paste the URL.

7. Remove the 'pending' label, and add a 'needs-resolution' tag to this tracker issue.

8. If you added an *lreq label, add the label 'spec-type-issue', add the corresponding language label, and a label to indicate the relevant typographic feature(s), eg. 'i:line_breaking'. The latter represent categories related to the Language Enablement Index, and all start with i:.

9. Edit this issue to REMOVE ALL THE INSTRUCTIONS & THE PROPOSED COMMENT, ie. the line below that is '---' and all the text before it to the very start of the issue.

---

This is a tracker issue. Only discuss things here if they are i18n WG internal meta-discussions about the issue. Contribute to the actual discussion at the following link:

§ url_for_the_issue_raised

[aphillips]

I'm not sure I agree with the assertion as a whole! One can try to determine the language programmatically. Such a prediction will often enough be wrong.

[xfq]

I think "programmatically determined" means attributes like lang and xml:lang here, see:

• https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/#dfn-programmatically-determinable
• https://www.w3.org/TR/wcag2ict-22/#dfn-programmatically-determinable
• https://www.boia.org/blog/what-programmatically-determined-means-for-accessibility