- 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