Prepare front-door for Tech Preview #697
Conversation
This includes a short paragraph under "What is MessageFormat 2?" whose purpose is to satisfy #693 (the need for a v45 "intro paragraph")
aphillips
added
organizational
README.md
Outdated
| It is intended for adoption by programming languages and APIs. | ||
| It enables the integration of internationalization APIs (such as date and number formats), | ||
| grammatical matching (such as plurals or genders), | ||
| as well as user-defined formats and message selectors, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"user" may be misunderstood by a general audience.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reworded to talk about extensibility.
Co-authored-by: Mark Davis <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Eemeli Aro <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Eemeli Aro <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Eemeli Aro <[email protected]>
| The MFWG specifically requests feedback on the following issues: | ||
| - How to perform non-integer exact number selection [#675](https://github.com/unicode-org/message-format-wg/issues/675) | ||
| - Whether `markup` should support additional spaces [#650](https://github.com/unicode-org/message-format-wg/issues/650) | ||
| - Whether "attribute-like" behavior is needed and what form it should take [#642](https://github.com/unicode-org/message-format-wg/issues/642) | ||
| - Whether to relax constraints on complex message start [#610](https://github.com/unicode-org/message-format-wg/issues/610) | ||
| - Whether omitting the `*` variant key should be permitted [#603](https://github.com/unicode-org/message-format-wg/issues/603) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Per recent discussions, I think we also care about feedback on the resolved value details (#678), and I personally would also like feedback on the desirability of syntax divergence between simple and complex messages (which is more general than #610 in its current form, cf. #610 (comment) and its outbound link tree). I guess the latter might be #512?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for this. The list here consists strictly of items tagged with "seek feedback" label. I agree with most of your observations and will add some details shortly.
I personally would also like feedback on the desirability of syntax divergence between simple and complex messages (which is more general than #610 in its current form, cf. #610 (comment) and its outbound link tree). I guess the latter might be #512?
I think these are details of the syntax? Wouldn't feedback about the syntax in general work better? How intuitive (or unintuitive) it is to use, whether simple-vs-complex is easy to grok, etc.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think these are details of the syntax? Wouldn't feedback about the syntax in general work better? How intuitive (or unintuitive) it is to use, whether simple-vs-complex is easy to grok, etc.
Yes, but we should have specific prompts to get specific feedback.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Always happy to get suggestions 😸
Co-authored-by: Addison Phillips <[email protected]>
|
I'm going to commit this so that @srl295 and I can make the Monday deadline with text. This is not the final word on our front door text. Submit more PRs if you're unhappy with what I've done here. |
This includes a short paragraph under "What is MessageFormat 2?" whose purpose is to satisfy #693 (the need for a v45 "intro paragraph")