- From: Martin J. Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 09:08:33 +0900
- To: Patrick Andries <andries@IRO.UMontreal.CA>
- Cc: "'Ian Jacobs'" <ij@w3.org>, Francois Yergeau <yergeau@alis.com>, "w3c-translators@w3.org" <w3c-translators@w3.org>, "'alb@sct.gouv.qc.ca'" <alb@sct.gouv.qc.ca>
At 11:21 99/02/09 -0500, Patrick Andries wrote: > Ian Jacobs wrote : > > I think almost nothing is cast in stone. However, if > > we accept one, where do we stop? > > [Patrick Andries] I suspect this is a rhetorical question. Well, I wouldn't mind if you could give a good answer. The fact is that we just don't have one. > [Patrick Andries] Which brings forth another question : > will the W3C standards ever become ISO > standards ? Yes, indeed. There is work on making HTML an ISO standard. However, this is a very short document, mainly containing the DTD, and refering to the W3C Recommendation for all the rest. Otherwise, the rewriting of the spec would have introduced too many incompatibilities. > Could a country, let say Canada, make XML, > for instance, a national standard and present it to the ISO > as a proposed international standard ? In this way, these > standards would have an officially approved (quality) translation > in all the countries that care to have one, as was the case for > SGML. The Japanese Standard Association already issues translations of some W3C documents as what they call "Technical Reports". This gives them an "official" translation, without having to make it a standard. But these "official" translations also have their problems. I have heard that for a publication in a book, the translation has to be adapted because the "official" language is too particular and difficult to understand. Regards, Martin. #-#-# Martin J. Du"rst, World Wide Web Consortium #-#-# mailto:duerst@w3.org http://www.w3.org
Received on Tuesday, 9 February 1999 19:54:46 UTC