Re: Action 1051 with open status...

The person who wrote that text was from the Internationalisation Working  
Group. Since the section is non-normative, and only a "hint", we don't  
think it is imperative to say more, but briefly:

* "Bicameral": it is not up to us to define which scripts are bicameral.
* "mutually exclusive": it is not up to us to define which character  
properties are exclusive.
* IRIs: are used for character properties, not scripts, and is quite  
specific: "This specification does not define any URIs for use as tokens,  
but allows others to define such URIs for extensibility. This may become  
necessary for devices with input modes that cannot be covered by the  
tokens provided here. The URI should dereference to a human-readable  
description of the input mode associated with the use of the URI as a  
token. This description should describe the input mode indicated by this  
token, and whether and how this token modifies other tokens or is modified  
by other tokens."
* inputmode is declared as xs:string, which is allowed to be empty.

Best wishes,

Steven Pemberton


On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 04:26:50 +0200, Guntur Wiseno Putra  
<gsenopu@gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear All
>
>
> Would it be helpful...?
>
> Am I right to post a respond here at public-xformsusers@w3.org related  
> with Action 1051 sent by Steven Pemberton:
>
> https://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/xforms/actions/1051
>
> of which there is a link to
>
>
> https://www.w3.org/History/
>
> ...?
>
> I finded a related page (which was about https://www.w3.org/History/) I  
> did not see at glance at the page mentioned before which was
>
>> A summary of the history of the WWW project:
> https://www.w3.org/History/19921103-hypertext/hypertext/WWW/History.html
> (I ever sent the information on the address to public-webhistory@w3.org  
> on March 25 2019.)
>
>
> Regard,
> Guntur Wiseno Putra