W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-its@w3.org > July to September 2006

RE: Question about reference to OpenDocument

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>
Message-ID: <001101c6dd10$5485ade0$0300a8c0@Breizh>

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.


>> 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.

Received on Wednesday, 20 September 2006 23:56:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:04:11 UTC