W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-core@w3.org > April to June 2016

RE: HTML5.1 review

From: Phillips, Addison <addison@lab126.com>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 03:36:47 +0000
To: "ishida@w3.org" <ishida@w3.org>
CC: "public-i18n-core@w3.org" <public-i18n-core@w3.org>
Message-ID: <e80855a2e08f4dfba7e3070b7f5b2c5a@EX13D08UWB003.ant.amazon.com>
(reduced audience)

I know we've tagged HTML5's issues with that label, but that includes things that aren't in 51? Would it make sense to use the html51 label just for the purposes of this review? Or should we review and discard old issues while we're at it?

Not particularly concerned either way, so long as we're consistent.

Addison

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ishida@w3.org [mailto:ishida@w3.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2016 7:45 PM
> To: Phillips, Addison <addison@lab126.com>; tink@tink.uk; www-
> international@w3.org
> Cc: team-html-editors@w3.org; team-webplatform@w3.org; public-i18n-
> core@w3.org
> Subject: Re: HTML5.1 review
> 
> On 10/05/2016 23:58, Phillips, Addison wrote:
> > These are identified by the tag #html51.
> 
> Actually, we've been labelling them using #html. See
> https://github.com/w3c/i18n-activity/labels/html

> 
> ri

Received on Wednesday, 11 May 2016 03:37:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:02:12 UTC