- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:05:25 +0100
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
On Friday, March 12, 2004, 5:09:07 PM, Jeremy wrote: >>Er, can this doc go to recommendation with IRIs still uncooked? I >>would probably agree with the spirit of this criterion if we knew a >>little bit more about IRIs. -Tim JC> See JC> http://www.w3.org/International/Group/2002/charmod-lc/SortByOriginator.html#C031 JC> (member link) JC> which raised precisely this point (some years ago) JC> I found the response satisfactory JC> [[ JC> Our plan is that the IRI ID, referenced in this section, will have been JC> submitted for Proposed Standard by the time CharMod moves to the next stage. JC> ]] My understanding is that both URI (2396bis) and IRI are 'in the queue' for the RFC editor, who can fix up the normative reference from IRI to 2396bis once the latter is assigned an RFC number. Tim - this was discussed at the joint TAG/I18N session at the technical plenary. -- Chris Lilley mailto:chris@w3.org Chair, W3C SVG Working Group Member, W3C Technical Architecture Group
Received on Friday, 12 March 2004 12:05:25 UTC