[Sorry if you have already received an email similar to this, I'm having
email issues at my end.]
I have come to realise that Lou is right about this.
Even in Piotr's minimal case, xml:lang already has a meaning and a
meaning that matters in the real world:
<ptr xml:id="..." target="..." type="..." xml:lang="pl" n="a"/>
<ptr xml:id="..." target="..." type="..." xml:lang="sw" n="b"/>
The language of the @n attributes 'a' and 'b' are determined by their
respective @xml:lang attributes. If systems potentially use @n
attributes for collation or display (as we do at the NZETC), then
language of the @n attributes matters.
Thus, this is not a case where unspecified meaning in the standard can
be exploited to stash the language of the referent.
Library Technology Services http://www.victoria.ac.nz/library/