- From: John C Klensin <john+w3c@jck.com>
- Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2023 17:03:38 -0400
- To: 'Internationalization Working Group' <public-i18n-core@w3.org>, Addison Phillips <addisoni18n@gmail.com>
Addison, As indicated earlier, I will not be able to participate in tomorrow's call, so one comment: The IETF has work going on in the SEDATE WG [1] on time and time zone representations, including a document, draft-ietf-sedate-datetime-extended [2], that has already completed IETF Last Call. There is also a WG named LAMPS that has been addressing issues with X.509 certificates, including issues with non-ASCII identifiers. I could easily have missed something, but a quick glance through the VC materials did not seem to show awareness of those efforts. If there are some overlaps in the work, as appears to be the case, and the proposals are not completely consistent, awareness of the nearly parallel efforts should be clear and the differences documented and explained. Probably that should start with some formal liaison effort between the VC group and the two IETF WGs: I see no sign of awareness that there is W3C work going on in this area in either the SEDATE or LAMPS charters. thanks, john [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/sedate/about/ [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sedate-datetime-extended/ [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/lamps/about/ --On Wednesday, July 5, 2023 09:33 -0700 Addison Phillips <addisoni18n@gmail.com> wrote: > All, > > I added the following to the agenda: > > Topic: Verifiable Credentials: time handling and I18N > Considerations VC appears to be working to "button up" their > spec and has made a number of PRs related to date/time > handling. They also would like to create an "I18N > Considerations" section. I made some responses to their PRs > (links below), but we should probably discuss these. > > * https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/pull/1183 > * https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-integrity/pull/111 > > > > > > Addison Phillips > > Chair (W3C Internationalization WG) > > > > Internationalization is not a feature. > > It is an architecture. > > >
Received on Wednesday, 5 July 2023 21:03:50 UTC