W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-geo@w3.org > October 2003

Articles

From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 15:13:13 +0100
To: <public-i18n-geo@w3.org>
Message-ID: <001901c3996f$cf3b85b0$6501a8c0@w3c40upc3ma3j2>

All,

I have mentioned once or twice my idea of creating a set of 'articles'
on i18n topics to accompany the guidelines and faqs.  This was given
additional impetus when I looked at the Netscape DevEdge site
http://devedge.netscape.com/viewsource/ a little while back.  My current
plan is to slowly convert the longer items in the Hints & Tips section
of our site http://www.w3.org/International/resources.html#hints to
either faqs or articles linked to by a new page.   I have mocked up such
a page at 

http://www.w3.org/International/articles.html

to show the idea.

I see the articles as less focussed and slightly longer than a typical
FAQ, but they should still be written to a specific brief and remain
concise.  I think this is an ideal way to point to additional material
that supports the guidelines, eg. the background info on inline bidi.

Note that I have added links to a number of articles from my own site
just to add bulk here.  We should consider whether it is appropriate to
incorporate them for real in our list of articles.

I think we need to discuss the following:

A. Should we limit contributions to the GEO group participants?  For
example, Kat Momoi wrote a very good article for DevEdge on IDN
http://devedge.netscape.com/viewsource/2003/idn/

B. Where should articles be located? - for example, if we do include the
articles of mine that I've put on the mockup page, I'd prefer to do it
as an automatically updated copy (that uses whatever style we decide on
for our articles) and continue to serve my articles on my own site too.
I don't think we should simply link to locations outside the W3C site.

C. What level of review should be required for such articles.  I believe
the articles should be carefully reviewed by the group, just like FAQs
or guidelines, so that we can claim that they are authoritative.  We
should not simply include stuff that people have written that 'contains
some useful bits'.

D. Should this be open to submissions from other parts of the i18n WG
(eg. Core or WS), rather than just GEO contributors.  My feeling is that
yes it should be.  Do we want to review that before publication though?

Comments and suggestions?

RI


============
Richard Ishida
W3C

contact info: http://www.w3.org/People/Ishida/ 

http://www.w3.org/International/ 
http://www.w3.org/International/geo/ 

See the W3C Internationalization FAQ page
http://www.w3.org/International/questions.html
Received on Thursday, 23 October 2003 10:13:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:28:00 UTC