You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In 2.4, there is a sentence, "Our specifications and websites are well internationalized, provide support for language and cultural adaptation, and support localization, so that our work is accessible to all users, regardless of language, writing system, or culture. " Our specifications" is not difficult to understand. What exactly does "our websites" mean here? W3C website?
This is a statement of the ethical principles of the W3C community.
So I think "us" is "the W3C community". That would imply that "our websites" are the websites produced by everyone in the W3C community, rather than just the W3C itself, but that wouldn't really make sense in a document whose stated purpose is to guide charter and specification development. So Angel's guess of "W3C websites" is probably closer to the original intent. Maybe, then, a clarification of
Our specifications and the websites that host them
The original intent, I think is that it (aspirationally) means the web sites produced by members of the w3c community. Because we want "our" web sites to be internationalised (etc...) we therefore must have specifications that support these capabilities. We could probably use clearer wording.
The original intent, I think is that it (aspirationally) means the web sites produced by members of the w3c community. Because we want "our" web sites to be internationalised (etc...) we therefore must have specifications that support these capabilities. We could probably use clearer wording.
Thanks! In this case, something like " W3C specifications and the websites of members in W3C community should be well internationalized, provide support for language and cultural adaptation, and support localization, so that our work is accessible to all users, regardless of language, writing system, or culture. " ?
Originally posted by @lianqi in #141 (comment)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: