- From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 17:25:09 +0100
- To: "Phillips, Addison" <addison@lab126.com>
- CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, "public-i18n-core@w3.org" <public-i18n-core@w3.org>
Ok, I'll look out for your doc, and start the publication process once i receive it. Btw, please use the latest respec link: http://www.w3.org/Tools/respec/respec-w3c-common (it fixes a bunch of publication related issues) RI On 10/09/2013 17:20, Phillips, Addison wrote: > I'm working on the missing respec references this morning in between things. I just have to push them up on github. After that, I'll update our editor's copy using the 5 September version (no need to FPWD the earlier one we currently have). > > Anne, if you plan to do any updates in the very near future, let me know so we can take that instead. > > Addison > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Richard Ishida [mailto:ishida@w3.org] >> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 9:02 AM >> To: Anne van Kesteren >> Cc: Phillips, Addison; public-i18n-core@w3.org >> Subject: Re: Urgent: Encoding spec status >> >> I'm happy to push the document through the publication process as a FPWD, >> and we may be able to publish it this week. >> >> I need to know which version to publish though. (Is the 5 sep version the one >> that you're talking about Anne?) >> >> Addison, if we publish a different version from the current editor's draft at >> /International, is it just a question of changing the respec information? >> >> RI >> >> >> On 10/09/2013 16:50, Anne van Kesteren wrote: >>> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Phillips, Addison <addison@lab126.com> >> wrote: >>>> We (W3C) can publish a working draft of our version any time. I'm also set >> up to take updates from Anne as needed. I see there is a version dated 5 >> September that I can take now. I'll let Anne comment on the relative status of >> the WhatWG version. >>> >>> It's WHATWG. >>> >>> There's still some open issues, but I've made some substantial >>> improvements around error handling. I plan on making the algorithms >>> and encoding "class hierarchy" a bit clearer too, as well as >>> explaining the concept of streams more clearly. >>> >>> What's most important still is implementation feedback. The API has >>> been implemented and is generally found useful. Implementations have >>> started tweaking their encoding tables and label data, but it's still >>> a long way to go. >>> >>> Could we please communicate in public about this going forward? A >>> simple cc to www-archive would be fine for me. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Richard Ishida -- Richard Ishida
Received on Tuesday, 10 September 2013 16:25:42 UTC