- From: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 17:27:14 +0900
- To: "Miller, Susan K" <susan.k.miller@boeing.com>, <public-i18n-geo@w3.org>
At 07:02 04/09/20 -0700, Miller, Susan K wrote: >An initial draft of the FAQ "How do you define globalization, >internationalization and localization? How are these concepts related?" >is available at http://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-i18n. >Please provide your comments prior to the Wednesday, September 22 >telecon. Hello Susan, Great work! Some comments: "number of letters abbreviated": I had problems with reading that, and I expect some other non-english speakers have, too. What about "number of removed letters" or "number of letters between 'i' and 'n'"? Also, I think it's better to make a second sentence rather than introduce 'i18n' in a parenthesis. "providing support for elements that may not be implemented until localization occurs (e.g., bidi tags)": I'm confused here. What kinds of products are you speaking about? A browser should support bidi markup when it's internationalized, not only when it's localized. In general, I'd like to reduce reliance on 'localization' when defining internationalization. I think the core of internationalization is generalizing the functionality of a product so that it can handle various different languages/scripts/cultures, including mixtures, and that it can easily be adapted to different languages/scripts/cultures where necessary. This also brings in the idea that much of a product can be generic, or allow mixtures, a point which I think is important, in particular on the WWW. "(think back to the Y2K effort)": If you want to use that example (which I think is a good one), please add a bit more explanation, so that it's easier to see the parallel. Some people may have been very involved in Y2K, others may not know too much about it. "actual _adaptation_ of a product": Having just a single word in bold in the whole page is probably not worth it. I think it would be good to get rid of the word 'Defining' in the title. You give very good and useful explanations, but not really definitions. Regards, Martin.
Received on Tuesday, 21 September 2004 11:55:06 UTC