- From: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 13:02:51 +0900
- To: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>, public-iri@w3.org
Hello Graham, Many thanks for your quick responses. I have closed issues normRef-33, 3.1BC-norm-29, and needAPI-34. Regards, Martin. At 13:03 04/05/12 +0100, Graham Klyne wrote: >For the record, I'm entirely satisfied with this response. > >#g >-- > >At 18:13 12/05/04 +0900, Martin Duerst wrote: >>Hello Graham, >> >>I have listed this as issue normRef-33. >> >> >>At 12:02 04/05/10 +0100, Graham Klyne wrote: >> >>>References >>> >>>I think RFC2119 should appear under Normative references, not Informative. >> >>Done. >> >> >>>I don't know about this, but should [UNIV4] and [UNI9] be normative? >> >>They are referenced in a normative sentence in the bidi section, so >>yes, fixed. I guess we could move [UNIV4] out of that, if we really >>want (our reference practice seems to lean towards ISO 10646, >>rather than Unicode). >> >>Michel, what do you think? Can you have a look at it? >>I guess the reference to 10646 may also need updating, >>can you give me the newest version? >> >> >>Regards, Martin. > >------------ >Graham Klyne >For email: >http://www.ninebynine.org/#Contact
Received on Thursday, 13 May 2004 00:14:52 UTC