Eemeli Aro

> I still maintain that its easier on message writers (our largest audience) if there is a clearly defined behavior that allows them to write minimal messages in which the...

One way of expressing the root issue here is that currently, the simplest way of expressing a message does not match with what ought to be used for the right...

> Don't hesitate to shut me down if this has already been hashed out, but I'm also now wondering if the root of the confusion stems from expressions being sometimes...

> If we think of it this way: > > ``` > .match {$count :plural} > one {{You have {$count :number} apple}} > * {{You have {$count :number} apples}} >...

> The problem here is that our mental model of what the "formatting context" is differs. I think it is the set of resolved values visible only to formatting functions/selectors...

> You're overlooking the actual section on [formatting context](https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr35/tr35-messageFormat.html#formatting-context), which lists five things: I'm not, though. Note this important part of Function Resolution: > Function access to the _formatting context_...

> We do need to point to CLDR data (which this PR doesn't solve). I think that recreating plurals.xml in the registry is wasteful and will lead to a binding...

Okay, let's fix all of it here then. I added `` as a grouping element for the `` elements, with an option to include an `href` attribute instead; kinda like...

Should we hold a separate call on the registry, to align ourselves on its core user stories? We do have the registry's [Goals](https://github.com/unicode-org/message-format-wg/blob/main/spec/registry.md#goals) section, but it's rather focused on end...

Closing due to #815.