- From: <Misha.Wolf@reuters.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 16:26:07 +0100
- To: www-i18n-workshop@w3.org, locales@yahoogroups.com
The purpose of the W3C Internationalization Workshop [w3c-i18n-ws] was
to gather information to assist the W3C in drawing up new charters for
the W3C Internationalization Activity and for the Working Groups(s) and
Interest Group(s) making up this rechartered Activity.
The Workshop participants considered that the following topics are
important [conclusions]:
Guidelines, best practices
Existing work (reviews, character model, liaisons)
Distributed services incl Web services, locales, collations
Education & Outreach
Localizability
Gathering user requirements/solutions
Multilingual domain names (IDN)
The purpose of the current discussion on the www-i18n-workshop list is
not solving any of these problems, but rather answering questions such
as:
1. Why is topic X important?
2. Why should the W3C work on topic X?
3. How can you and your organization help with the work on topic X?
Though the discussions have shed some light on points 1 and 2, they have
been pretty silent on point 3. W3C Working Groups (WGs) are made up of
employees of Member organisations and Invited Experts. For a given
topic to be included in a WG charter requires commitment from potential
WG members (including a suitable potential Chair). It would be most
helpful if people who want to see a particular topic included in the new
charters *and are willing to put sustained work into it* would write to
the www-i18n-workshop list, offering their services, and giving their
status vis-a-vis the W3C (eg employee of Member organisation Y).
[w3c-i18n-ws] http://www.w3.org/2002/02/01-i18n-workshop
[conclusions] http://www.w3.org/2002/02/01-i18n-workshop/consensus
Thanks,
Misha Wolf
W3C I18N WG Chair
-------------------------------------------------------------- --
Visit our Internet site at http://www.reuters.com
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be
the views of Reuters Ltd.
Received on Wednesday, 10 April 2002 11:28:40 UTC