- From: Karl Fritsche <karl.fritsche@cocomore.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 09:41:14 +0200
- To: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
- CC: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>, "public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org" <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
Hi all, On 11.07.2013 08:49, Daniel Glazman wrote: > On 11/07/13 08:38, Felix Sasaki wrote: > >> How to move forward? I would propose to document the issue in a note in >> the spec and would ask Daniel to draft the note, if that's ok with you. > > Even if it's not very satisfactory - we have to select the weakest > choice for various reasons - I'm ok with that. +1 for having a note in ITS2.0 and moving this to the IG. > >> Also, I would propose to have a topic in the interest group about "non >> XML syntax for ITS global rules / standoff markup in ITS 2.0". At >> Daniel: in the ITS IG we are discussing topics that are best practices >> or not yet developed for ITS 2.0 - but will give input to ITS 2.x / 3 >> etc. You had mentioned before that you would be interested to work on >> such a syntax. Would you still be interested? > > Yes. It's not difficult. > > </Daniel> > This would be great, thanks for the effort Daniel. I love the idea of maybe using JSON for HTML instead of XML. But you will always find things which can be done better, thats why I'm in favor to move forward with ITS2.0 and handling this for the next version. Otherwise we risk to have no ITS2.0 at all. In my mind this would be the best solution for now, if Daniel and everybody else is fine with this. Cheers Karl
Received on Thursday, 11 July 2013 07:41:46 UTC