RE: Requesting i18n review for ActivityPub

Hi,

We'd be glad to review the doc. I will note that the 11th is a Tuesday, which means that it will be difficult for the I18N WG to do a review in time--our teleconferences are on Thursdays, so we have only a week to do this review. Since we spoke at TPAC, I know you understand: try to plan better next time :-). Also, I'm guessing this is the same document with a shortname of "activitypub" [1]

Regards (for I18N),

Addison

Addison Phillips
Principal SDE, I18N Architect (Amazon)
Chair (W3C I18N WG)

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.


[1] https://www.w3.org/TR/activitypub/

https://w3c-social.github.io/activitypub/ 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher Allan Webber [mailto:cwebber@dustycloud.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 2:14 PM
> To: www-international@w3.org
> Cc: public-socialweb@w3.org
> Subject: Requesting i18n review for ActivityPub
> 
> Hello,
> 
> ActivityPub is aiming to enter Candidate Recommendation by the 11th, and
> we'd like to request a review for any potential i18n issues.
> ActivityPub is a client to server (eg mobile applications, desktop applications,
> etc) and server to server (federation) standard for propagating social
> network activity through the web.
> 
> I've gone through the checklist... I don't personally anticipate much to be
> flagged that hasn't already been so for ActivityStreams, on which ActivityPub
> heavily relies.  ActivityPub uses ActivityStreams for its vocabulary and
> serialization mechanism (via json-ld), which has already gone through i18n
> review.  Aside from that, most of what ActivityPub specifies is endpoints to
> which ActivityStreams objects may be submitted.
> 
> Any and all feedback is welcome.  Thank you!
> 
>  - Christopher Allan Webber,
>    on behalf of ActivityPub and the Social WG

Received on Wednesday, 28 September 2016 12:24:12 UTC