- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 21:37:40 +0900
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- CC: Tex Texin <tex@yahoo-inc.com>, WWW International <www-international@w3.org>
Jeremy Carroll wrote: > > Tex Texin wrote: > >> At the same time, I am skeptical about the term "best practices". >> > > > This term is used in quite a few W3C activities. > > I've seen it mean a practice that falls short of a 'recommendation' > and has a lower level of consensus and review, but is nevertheless a > thought out position that has sufficient consensus to be published. > > One advantage of using a WG Note rather than a recommendation is that > the cost of change is fairly low. In terms of the Unicode vs markup > issue you seem to be suggesting that the best practice (of using > markup) will soon be superceded by the opposite of using best practice > of using unicode bidi chars .... I'm not sure if this will be the case. Note that http://www.w3.org/TR/unicode-xml/#Bidi which Yves mentioned in this thread, is part of a document that was rather recently published, with a certain degree of endorsement from the Unicode consortium and the W3C (i18n core WG). > personally I would hope that when and if the consensus here comes > round to that point of view, then this document could be updated > relatively easily. yes, much easier than a W3C Recommendation. Felix
Received on Thursday, 14 February 2008 12:37:58 UTC