- From: Pablo Nieto Caride <pablo.nieto@linguaserve.com>
- Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2013 11:16:06 +0200
- To: "'Felix Sasaki'" <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Cc: <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
Ok perfect, I'll try to close both before next publication, talk to you later. Cheers, Pablo. __________________________________ Hi Pablo, Am 03.04.13 10:42, schrieb Pablo Nieto Caride: > Hi Felix, all, > > I'm already working on it, but I'm not an implemeter of the data > category so I wasn't very familiar with the issue so I'm still doing > some research. I need to clarify some doubts: > Based on the issue raised by Yves last December, two actions were created: > 1) Action-385 to create a common sub-set of regex supported by most of > the engines, to substitute the recommendation of using the XML Schema > Character Class regular expression syntax, because it's less > interoperable (I agree with Yves). This sub-set would be still > compatible and useable with implementations using a XML Schema regular > expression engine, and no changes on the test files would be needed > since the regular expressions used on the files are simple and would be covered by the sub-set. > 2) Action-430 to write a BP note explaining the importance of using > Unicode normalization (I think this is important) > > The situation right now is that: > For 1) Shaun created a sub-set that Felix corrected: > ^(\.|\[\^?-?(([	

 -,.-[_-
 > 7FF;&# > xE000;-�𐀀-]|\\n|\\r|\\t|\\]|\\^|\\-|\\\\)(-([ > 	 > 

 -,.-[_-퟿-� > Ā 00;-]|\\n|\\r|\\t|\\]|\\^|\\-|\\\\))?)+-?\])?$ > but it's returning the error: missing "]" > For 2) Shaun didn't write anything. > > Am I correct? Yes, that's correct. I think the action-430 is not that critical, but having action-385 closed before the next publication would be great. > > Anyway I'll do my best to have it finished by Friday or Monday the > latest, we can talk about this on today's call. Great, thanks. Best, Felix > > Cheers, > Pablo. > ______________________________________________________________________ > > Hi all, > > we should publish a new draft under w3.org/TR/ soon. The last > publication is about 5 months ago. We are two months late, see > http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/process.html#three-month-ru > le > > "It is important that a Working Group keep the Membership and public > informed of its activity and progress. To this end, each Working Group > SHOULD publish in the W3C technical reports index a new draft of each > active technical report at least once every three months. An active > technical report is a Working Draft, Candidate Recommendation, > Proposed Recommendation, or Proposed Edited Recommendation. Each > Working Group MUST publish a new draft of at least one of its active > technical reports on the W3C technical reports index [PUB11] at least once every three months." > > I would not publish this week, but rather try to get two things done > - close "allowed characters". Pablo, could you do > https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/actions/385 > https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/actions/430 > this week? > > - work on NIF > https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/actions/458 > https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/actions/460 > I would do that this week > > potentially more (e.g. with regards to the relation to HTML), if we > have time + consensus. > > We then could publish next week. Let's discuss this during tomorrow's call. > > Best, > > Felix > >
Received on Wednesday, 3 April 2013 09:17:26 UTC