From: Mark Davis (mark.davis@jtcsv.com)
Date: Tue Apr 27 2004 - 16:21:35 EDT
We have added a new section to the CLDR process document to try to clarify how
the public can interact with the project. See
http://www.unicode.org/cldr/process.html.
In practice, I don't think there will be a problem with participation, as we've
discussed before; one of the reasons that we moved CLDR from OpenI18N to Unicode
was that we believe it will enable more interaction by a variety of people and
organizations. As to the costs and benefits of joining Unicode, people can see
them on:
http://www.unicode.org/consortium/why_join.html
http://www.unicode.org/consortium/join.html
Mark
__________________________________
http://www.macchiato.com
► शिष्यादिच्छेत्पराजयम् ◄
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael (michka) Kaplan" <michka@trigeminal.com>
To: <unicode@unicode.org>
Sent: Mon, 2004 Apr 26 09:10
Subject: Re: [META] Should there be a separate public list for CLDR?
> From: "Mark Davis (by way of Michael Everson)" <mark.davis@jtcsv.com>
>
> > There seems to be some misapprehension here. The
> > unicode@unicode.org 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
> been
> > discussed there by various people. We do not restrict the content of the
> list.
> > And the signal to noise ratio is very low; just take a moment to look
> yourself
> > 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
> CLDR
> > will be taking place on cldr@unicode.org, 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
> unicode@unicode.org 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
> case),
>
> MichKa
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Apr 27 2004 - 16:54:17 EDT