- From: Yves Savourel <yves@opentag.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 17:56:02 -0600
- To: <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Cc: <public-i18n-its@w3.org>
Hi Felix, >> Was there a reason to have this in the specification? Why talking >> about OpenDocument? Not XHTML?, not other formats? > > XHTML cite the W3C Ruby TR, so no need to refer to XHTML here. > I'm not aware of other standardized formats than the ruby TR and ODF, and I think it is worth mentioning both of them. OK. >> why saying this >> for Ruby and not for Directionality, for for Translate and DITA? > > We can do that, do you want to? No, otherwise we may have to mention 'translatable' in Glade, etc. We can't really list all the formats that have corresponding ITS markup. I guess that was my point: what made OpenDocument so special it has its own little note? :) But I'm fine with what's there. No need to change anything. -yves
Received on Wednesday, 20 September 2006 23:56:14 UTC