W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: [widgets] i18n proposals document

From: Mark Davis <mark.davis@icu-project.org>
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 10:20:55 -0700
Message-ID: <30b660a20904161020q6400ac05lc697668516cb85@mail.gmail.com>
To: marcosc@opera.com
Cc: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, "public-i18n-core@w3.org" <public-i18n-core@w3.org>
I just glanced at this, but the first line is wrong: Internationalization,
or i18n, is the automated process employed by a user agent to select
localized content from a widget package that matches the language
preferences of an end-user.

If you want a term for the latter phrase, fine. But that isn't the meaning
of "internationalization", which is a development process (enabling a
program to be easily localized, without code changes).
"internationalization" is not a user runtime selection process.

Mark


On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 09:41, Marcos Caceres <marcosc@opera.com> wrote:

> Hi i18n WG Members,
> As Web Apps has been struggling a bit to come to consensus on a
> coherent i18n model for widgets, we've prepared a document that
> attempts to map out a complete internationalization model for the
> Widgets 1.0: Packaging and Configuration specification:
>
> http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/i18n.html
>
> The purpose of the document is to tease out the complexities of an
> i18n model for widgets and to make a number of proposals that together
> form a complete i18n solution. The Web Apps WG would like to solicit
> some expertise from the i18n Working Group in getting this right.
>
> The document is a work in progress an should be considered an early
> draft (it basically just contains a bunch of strawperson proposals). I
> will continue attempting to improve document over the next few days,
> but please feel free to start sending feedback if you have any. Our
> intention is to decide what the best proposals are and integrate them
> into the Widgets 1.0 Packaging spec. I18n is basically the most
> significant issues blocking our spec from going to Second Last Call.
> We would really appreciate any thoughts or comments the i18n community
> might have (by the 23 of April if at all possible).
>
> Kind regards,
> Marcos
> --
> Marcos Caceres
> http://datadriven.com.au
>
>
Received on Thursday, 16 April 2009 17:21:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:31 GMT