Re: [META] Should there be a separate public list for CLDR?

From: Michael \(michka\) Kaplan (
Date: Mon Apr 26 2004 - 12:10:04 EDT

  • Next message: Peter Constable: "RFC 3066 tags vs. locales (was RE: Common Locale Data Repository Project"

    From: "Mark Davis (by way of Michael Everson)" <>

    > There seems to be some misapprehension here. The
    > list is for
    > anyone to say anything vaguely related to unicode, for which cldr
    qualifies as
    > much as collation, keyboards, and beer measurements, all of which have
    > discussed there by various people. We do not restrict the content of the
    > And the signal to noise ratio is very low; just take a moment to look
    > at the topics discussed. I have no desire to have
    > yet another list with the same
    > characteristics.
    > Any serious discussion of practical issues relating to the development of
    > will be taking place on, which IS a separate list.

    It is my understanding that this is a closed list. Perhaps the officers (and
    IBM!) need to have a full and frank discussion on the public perception of
    moving something out of open18n and into a place that requires a *minimum*
    $2000 cover charge for the right to have "serious discussion".

    I have no stake in this either way (worst case would just have me quit because I am tired of the stuff that feels offtopic to
    me, which may not be such a bad thing). But what this does to the reputation
    of Unicode itself (and perception of it) will be an interesting item to
    watch over the next year or so....

    Just a cat among the pigeons (though I am not the feline placer in this


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 26 2004 - 12:51:05 EDT