3 ms·
No. But e.g. automated translation now needs to guess your language, and that's... not always successful. Screenreaders will need to guess the language to prono
by groby_b 9y ago
No. But e.g. automated translation now needs to guess your language, and that's... not always successful. Screenreaders will need to guess the language to pronounce properly. Search engines will have to infer the language. And so on.
Your site isn't "broken", per se, but it's not as high quality as it could be.
- chrismorgan 9y agoI wonder how much lang=en can actually be trusted—enough things put it in by default that I can easily imagine its presence on non-English pages. Update: from elsewhere on this thread, Google ignores <html lang>: > But the language attribute within the HTML markup is something we don't use at all. We've found that this language markup is something that is almost always wrong. So we tend to ignore that. https://www.seroundtable.com/google-ignores-the-html-lang-attribute-22974.html https://www.seroundtable.com/google-ignores-the-html-lang-at...
- groby_b 9y agoIt tends to be more reliable if it's not lang=en. The cargo culting nature of web development makes some things a bit painful. FWIW, Chrome's translate feature does care about lang=. Or at least it did last time I checked. It's one of the things that has no downside, and a small upside. If you leave it out, your site isn't horribly broken. People will always get the content, but tools that process the content might be wrong.