Dear Webapps W/G members,
This is Channy Yun, one of web standards evangelists in Korea. I'm so glad
to introduce myself in this working group. I want to get advice from you
about as following my issue. Please don't hesitate to write your thought.
*Motivation*
As someone knows, Korea's browser
On Mar 19, 2009, at 12:06 PM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote:
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 4:52 PM, Andrew Welch
andrew.j.we...@gmail.com wrote:
That's exactly what I was talking about when I said even thought
the XML i18n
guidelines say it's bad practice,'.
Ahh very sorry, I just saw the email
In the context of the discussion about having a mandatory config file, I
proposed to simplify matters even further and have just one config file, with
the note that this proposal could be ignored in the interest of time and/or
effort. There are pros and cons to both approaches, as Marcos has
David - I was not able to submit my comments via the link you
provided below. Here is what I wanted to submit ...
Below are some comments regarding the BONDI 1.0 Release Candidate (RC).
These comments are sent as a Chair of the W3C's Web Applications
(WebApps) Working Group (WG) and do not
Marcos, Arve - although the status of the AE spec was on the agenda
of the March 19 widgets voice conference, we did not have time to get
to that item.
What is the status of the AE spec and which of the Widgets Open
Actions and Issues must be addressed before the AE spec is ready for
a
Hi Art,
I'll ensure that this input is considered. Many thanks for your
feedback.
David.
-Original Message-
From: Arthur Barstow [mailto:art.bars...@nokia.com]
Sent: 23 March 2009 01:02
To: David Rogers
Cc: public-webapps
Subject: [widgets] Comments on the 9-Feb-2009 BONDI v1.0 Release
