- From: Francois Yergeau <yergeau@alis.com>
- Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 10:56:03 -0500
- To: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Cc: w3c-translators@w3.org
À 17:46 08/02/99 -0500, Ian Jacobs a écrit : >I think almost nothing is cast in stone. However, if >we accept one, where do we stop? We don't have the time to >assure the quality of 15 translations of 50 specs, >so we just link to them with disclaimers. What's the difference between linking with a disclaimer and hosting with the same disclaimer? The W3C already hosts numerous documents (e.g. submissions) which it explicitely does not approve. Nothing new here. Hosting would provide stable URLs for translations of stable W3C specs. The W3C, with hosts on three continents, offices everywhere and "World Wide" in its name, shouldn't be that shy about translations. Furthermore, the Process document (http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/) says this (in 6.1) : "The primary language for official W3C documents is English. In addition to the official English version of a document, W3C welcomes translated versions." Doesn't look like a warm welcome to me, especially for translations made bona fide, without expending Consortium resources. Regards, -- François Yergeau
Received on Tuesday, 9 February 1999 11:00:01 UTC