W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > August 2011

Re: Any update on TAG request?

From: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 21:32:23 -0400
Message-ID: <4E4DBD27.80503@arcanedomain.com>
To: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
CC: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>, "Phillips, Addison" <addison@lab126.com>
Yes, I've been remiss and owe a followup. I convess that I'm not the one 
with domain expertise in this, but I intend to give it a look within the 
next few days to see whether I can figure out next steps, if any, for the 
TAG. My apologies for the delay; it had indeed slipped through the cracks 
when I went through my post-vacation email in early July, and was "lost" 
until I was reminded on the 4th of August.

Noah

On 8/18/2011 12:28 PM, Jonathan Rees wrote:
> [Content-free reply, just creating links for tracker]
>
> This came up on Aug 4, http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/08/04-minutes#item04
>
> There was no substantive discussion but...
>
> ACTION-590 - Follow up with Addison Phillips on Unicode normalization
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Jun/0188.html [on Noah
> Mendelsohn - due 2011-08-11]
>
> Jonathan
>
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 12:16 PM, Larry Masinter<masinter@adobe.com>  wrote:
>> I guess this flew by ... Maybe I'm completely missing something?  I'm not sure what the TAG is going to add to this, or why it should be a TAG finding.
>>
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Jun/0188.html
>>
>> contains:
>> # In the meantime, documents such as CSS3 Selectors and HTML5 depend on or could be impacted by Unicode Normalization.  In a discussion with Peter Linss, co-chair of CSS, and others [4],
>>
>> But there is no reference [4].
>>
>> # it was felt that the best course of action was to allow some or all existing specs to make progress while seeking a TAG finding to clarify the direction for normalization going forwards.
>>
>> I don't understand why this is the "best course of action"...
>>
>> You are the internationalization experts, the TAG are not. Why isn't the best course of action for the W3C I18N working group to finish its document based on community consensus, including the CSS and HTML working groups?
>>
>> #  Some members of our WG feel that closure on the issue of normalization is important for future interoperability.
>>
>> Yes, sounds good.
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/charmod-norm/
>>
>> If there were some disagreement or opposing viewpoints or an issue where the TAG could act as a tie-breaker, that might be a different situation, but so far all I can see is some work that the Internationalization working group (of which you are chair) hasn't finished.
>>
>> What am I missing?
>>
>> Larry
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Phillips, Addison
>> Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2011 5:47 PM
>> To: www-tag@w3.org
>> Cc: member-i18n-core@w3.org
>> Subject: Any update on TAG request?
>>
>> Dear TAG,
>>
>> Some time ago, I requested [1] some time from the TAG to consider the problem of normalization in W3C specs. I didn't get a response from the TAG. I do see a recent new action in your tracker (ACTION-590), but the minutes related to it seem slightly different from our request.
>>
>> Could you please clarify when we should prepare to discuss this issue with TAG?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Addison
>>
>> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Jun/0188.html
>>
>> Addison Phillips
>> Globalization Architect (Lab126)
>> Chair (W3C I18N WG)
>>
>> Internationalization is not a feature.
>> It is an architecture.
>>
>>
>
>
Received on Friday, 19 August 2011 01:33:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:39 GMT