While I think the script is great, it relies on the language tag (lang
) to determine the computer language. I believe that’s actually against the w3c’s standard:
The lang attribute’s value is a language code that identifies a natural language spoken, written, or otherwise used for the communication of information among people. Computer languages are explicitly excluded from language codes.
Basically RFC 1766 sets the stage on what’s an acceptable language for the tag and what’s not:
The language tag always defines a language as spoken (or written) by human beings for communication of information to other human beings. Computer languages are explicitly excluded.
Also the plugin uses pre
tags for markup. I believe code
would be a better choice, with the content’s language specified by the class attribute. This allows greater flexiblity in the code’s output such as inline code samples.
Sorry for the outburst and rant. I’m really interested in the plugin and must check it out later. But I have a few ideas I want to try with what I believe is a different motivation to aim for.