- From: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 14:43:45 -0400
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>, <gk@ninebynine.org>, <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>, w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org
At 18:30 03/05/27 +0100, Brian McBride wrote: >At 11:22 27/05/2003 -0400, Martin Duerst wrote: > >>Sorry for being offline so long. >> >>I have added the I18N WG back into the cc. > >Hmm, reviewing your post, I couldn't see how it related to I18N >issues. Perhaps this would be a good time to ask for summary of the I18N >issue and discussion so far. Martin? Hello Brian, My post was trying to address some specific points in the argumentation of Patrick and Jeremy, which is related to the overall issue. I copied i18n because I think they should have been copied on the whole discussion, not because that particular mail of mine was particularly important. On the i18n side, many of my colleagues still have a hard time understanding what is at issue, and the more of a chance they get to follow the discussion, the more they might have a chance to get an overall impression. Two days ago, the I18N WG (core TF) asked me for a summary. Now you are asking me for a summary. Unfortunately, these are two totally different summaries. What is more, I just had a very interesting long discussion this morning with Ralph, and agreed to write a summary of that, too. I hope to be able to do these things soon. Regards, Martin.
Received on Thursday, 29 May 2003 16:00:55 UTC