message-format-wg

message-format-wg copied to clipboard

Provide structure in the registry for distinguishing types of options

5

I think in the registry we need to be very clear about the following classes of effects that an option can have. (Of course, an option may do more than...

macchiati

Add `<when>` to help select the right `<match>`

10

As noted by @macchiati in https://github.com/unicode-org/message-format-wg/pull/471#issuecomment-1848074823: > One note: we might not want to treat `:integer` as simply an alias for `:number`. There is one difference in handling: > >...

eemeli

Clarify the formatting spec wrt. inspecting formattable values

7

_Originally posted by @stasm in https://github.com/unicode-org/message-format-wg/pull/511#discussion_r1383277678_ I'm not sure if the spec is currently clear enough about the requirement to allow functions to inspect the raw value and the formatting...

stasm

The function registry needs something more powerful than `readonly`

5

The current definition is ``` ``` I would propose something along these lines: ``` ```

mihnita

@gibson042 noted in a [comment](https://github.com/unicode-org/message-format-wg/pull/659/files#r1493039561): Do we have a place to record conformance tests? This requires rejection of inputs that naïve implementations might accept, e.g. * `| 1|` * `|.1|`...

aphillips

From 2024-02-15 discussion, we need to get feedback in tech preview about locale, id, and other attribute-like behavior

aphillips

Capture for discussion the general ideas for how to organize the registry in the post-45 time period. Notably, @sffc [mentioned number skeletons](https://github.com/unicode-org/message-format-wg/pull/621#discussion_r1482260505) in a comment on #621: > Note: My...

aphillips

Update spec as if PR #645 was accepted

1

**DO NOT MERGE** This PR is for reference purposes when reviewing #645, to show how the spec would change if the design doc in #645 was accepted. It should not...

catamorphism

Extending the registry is not defined and difficult

7

With our current registry definition, each `` may contain multiple `` and `` elements, each of which separately defines their inputs and options. I think this structure allows too much...

eemeli

How to refer to CLDR data on plural rules?

3

As discussed on https://github.com/unicode-org/message-format-wg/pull/534#discussion_r1406353057 and previously, it would be Very Good to be able to make use of the existing CLDR data at least in [`plurals.xml`](https://github.com/unicode-org/cldr/blob/main/common/supplemental/plurals.xml) and [`ordinals.xml`](https://github.com/unicode-org/cldr/blob/main/common/supplemental/ordinals.xml), which effectively...

eemeli