[i18n-activity] Should grammar of symbology be defined? (#878)

plehegar has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/i18n-activity:

== Should grammar of symbology be defined? ==
**This is a tracker issue.** Only discuss things here if they are i18n group internal meta-discussions about the issue. **Contribute to the actual discussion at the following link:**

ยง https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/141


Instructions:
- check for the following labels, then remove the PENDING label, then delete these instructions

- TRACKER & S:...  should be there
- add ADVICE-REQUESTED if the WG-issue is specifically asking for i18n to advise/comment
- add NEEDS-ATTENTION if this is an important issue

- if there's an i18n-*lreq label in the WG repo:
   -  ...LREQ label(s) should be there
   - SPEC-TYPE-ISSUE should be there
   - add TYPE-INFO-REQUEST if a request for script/language expert advice
    - add I:...  label(s)

Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/i18n-activity/issues/878 using your GitHub account

Received on Thursday, 9 April 2020 12:32:08 UTC