From: Mark Davis (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Jun 08 2004 - 14:33:52 CDT
The reports page wasn't updated -- sorry.
As to the UTS, when CLDR came into Unicode, we decided to have it and associated
UTS's in a separate committee (LTC), since its scope was sufficiently different
from the UTC's. http://www.unicode.org/reports/about-reports.html was updated to
reflect this change.
If you could look over http://www.unicode.org/cldr/ (and associated) and let me
know where there are places the text could be clarified, I'd appreciate it
(you're one of the most thorough reviewers!).
► शिष्यादिच्छेत्पराजयम् ◄
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Constable" <email@example.com>
Sent: Tue, 2004 Jun 08 10:09
Subject: RE: New versions of the Common Locale Data Repository (CLDR 1.1)
> > From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com]
> On Behalf
> > Of Rick McGowan
> > The Unicode(r) Consortium announced today the release of new versions
> of the
> > Common Locale Data Repository (CLDR 1.1) and the Locale Data Markup
> > Language specification (LDML 1.1),
> I'm confused: at http://www.unicode.org/cldr/, technical report #35 is
> referred to as an unqualified Unicode Technical Standard, whereas at
> http://www.unicode.org/reports/index.html it's referred to as a draft.
> What's the status of this thing? I've looked through minutes from the
> last five meetings and can find no reference to this.
> I'm wondering mainly because I've been concerned at some of the text in
> one portion of the draft and expected to see it some up on a UTC agenda,
> but it hasn't shown up so far.
> Peter Constable
> Globalization Infrastructure and Font Technologies
> Microsoft Windows Division
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jun 08 2004 - 14:35:22 CDT