I'd say remove them completely. The reason for leaving them in an
appendix, as my memory of Vancouver comes back slowly, was as sort of a
normative statement of what a reasonable level of internationalization
support DOM users should expect from their language/OS platform if they are
REALLY serious about having their dynamic content work properly no matter
what language the content is in.
Mike
p.s. What happened to the minutes of the String/Character discussion in
Vancouver?
At 10:44 AM 9/17/97 -0700, Steve Byrne wrote:
>Gavin Nicol writes:
> > >I have a distinct recollection that we agreed to remove the String and
> > >Character classes in Vancouver, but I can't find any of the
> > >String/Character discussion in the minutes. Didn't we decide that
this was
> > >in Unicode's court, not ours?
>
>I remember we talked about this, but I couldn't find the outcome minuted.
>
> > No, we agreed to make them an appendix. When I was reading the recent
> > draft (as with the earlier one), I found many errors in the descriptions.
> > I figure we should just drop them, as save the trouble of fixing the
> > descriptions.
>
>What do other folks feel about this? Should we a) remove them completely, b)
>remove them but leave a note (as I guess we're doing for Selections) that
we'll
>be adding this functionality into level 1 at a later date (on the assumption
>that it's better to not publish something than to publish something with
>errors), or c) something else? I'm happy to go whichever way the group
>decides, but I'd like to make sure I won't be doing something
objectionable to
>someone before I do it.
>
>Steve
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:36 EDT