W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-core@w3.org > October to December 2006

[I18N Core] Teleconference Minutes 2006-10-24

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 00:22:27 +0900
Message-ID: <453E2FB3.5020209@w3.org>
To: "public-i18n-core@w3.org" <public-i18n-core@w3.org>

... are at http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-i18ncore-minutes.html and below
as text. There are two action items which I added manually:

* Felix to classify open LTLI issues
* All to read Marks comments on IDNA issues

Felix


   [1]W3C

      [1] http://www.w3.org/

                             i18n core WG

24 Oct 2006

   [2]Agenda

      [2]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2006Oct/0011.html

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-i18ncore-irc

Attendees

   Present
          Felix, Francois, Mark, Mary

   Regrets
          Karunesh, Richard, Vijay

   Chair
          Francois

   Scribe
          Felix

Contents

     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]previous minutes
         2. [6]actions
         3. [7]LTLI discussion
         4. [8]idna issue
     * [9]Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________

previous minutes

   Francois: approved

actions

   <scribe> ACTION: everybody to look for issues in
   [10]http://www.w3.org/TR/timezone (ONGOING) recorded in
   [11]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-i18ncore-minutes.html#action01]

     [10] http://www.w3.org/TR/timezone

   input from Felix at
   [12]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2006Oct/001
   4.html

     [12]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2006Oct/0014.html

   Francois: not clear what the difference between "UTC offset" and
   "zone offset"

   Felix: it's the same

   Francois: maybe Mark has something to say on this
   ... let's wait a week or so

   <scribe> ACTION: Felix to look for possible participants for the ws
   i18n work (ONGOING) [recorded in
   [13]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-i18ncore-minutes.html#action02]

   <scribe> ACTION: Felix to write a mail about possibility for SVG
   tiny specific IRI tests to martin and the i18n core list (ONGOING)
   [recorded in
   [14]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-i18ncore-minutes.html#action03]

   mail about the talk with Chris
   [15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-core/2006OctDec/
   0010.html

     [15]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-core/2006OctDec/0010.html

   <scribe> ACTION: Francois to give input to wiki for the LTLI summary
   (ONGOING) [recorded in
   [16]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-i18ncore-minutes.html#action04]

   <scribe> ACTION: Francois to reply to Schema WG on normalization
   issue. (PENDING) [recorded in
   [17]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-i18ncore-minutes.html#action05]

   <scribe> ACTION: Francois to build a current issues list on charmod
   norm (ONGOING) [recorded in
   [18]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-i18ncore-minutes.html#action06]

   <scribe> ACTION: Felix to update the review radar (DONE) [recorded
   in [19]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-i18ncore-minutes.html#action07]

LTLI discussion

   editor's copy at [20]http://www.w3.org/International/core/langtags/

     [20] http://www.w3.org/International/core/langtags/

   <fyergeau> [21]http://www.w3.org/International/core/langtags

     [21] http://www.w3.org/International/core/langtags

   francois: language identification part is fine
   ... needs updating for the RFCs

   mark: the pointer to BCP 47 , you have to be careful
   ... you only get to a part of the BCP. Send a note to the RFC-editor
   that there should be a pointer for both RFCs

   <scribe> ACTION: Felix to send a note to the RFC editor on the
   reference to the location of BCP 47 - RFCs [recorded in
   [22]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-i18ncore-minutes.html#action08]

   <mark> [23]http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/bcp/bcp47.txt

     [23] http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/bcp/bcp47.txt

   mark: this link leads not to the matching part. in the LTLI draft,
   there is a different link
   ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/bcp/bcp47.txt

   francois: which one is the offical one?

   mark: not sure

   francois: we can update the entry in the LTLI draft

   felix: I'll do

   francois: the parts on language identification is fine
   ... we have more work as we work at locales

   felix: is it still o.k. to concentrate on best practices for
   "language versus locale", and not define the field values like CLDR?

   mark: yes

   francois: LTLI should give recommendations how to specify locales on
   the web, kind of "best practices"

   Mary: in some cases encoding was part of a locale

   Francois: in posix, but that was not good
   ... this could be a subject we could address

   discussion on various locale models

   mark: java and cldr are almost purely on language

   felix: besides "locale versus language", how about matching? should
   LTLI talk about it?

   mark: could be
   ... as Richard pointed out, many people put in some language
   information not exactly
   ... we did a search what people put in accept-lang , and it is a
   mess
   ... e.g. many people put in the underbar instead of a dash
   ... we would canonicalize those
   ... the use of xml:lang or lang as attributes gets even worse

   felix: a kind of BP for matching in e.g. http and xml?

   mark: bp for receivers / senders

   francois notes IE7 and language negotiation

   mark: it is extremly fuzzy what a "locale" means
   ... does "en-US" means my citizenship? the place I am on vacation?

   francois: agree, but the language tag received from a browser is not
   from where you are travelling

   mark: it is the language of my browser setting
   ... there is nothing we can do to influence people to set up their
   browser

   francois: people will not read the w3c spec and set up their browser

   mark: we do language detection on documents
   ... we don't rely on the tags
   ... that includes both xml:lang and the http header
   ... there is a lot of material mistagged
   ... going back to locale:
   ... I would recommend BP for a user should do , a browser / UA, a
   server, a receipient

   felix: sounds good

   francois: on web applications
   ... which resemble more desctop applications than web pages
   ... for whose, we need to describe how an application could gather
   the information

   mark: at least make the relationship between language and locale
   clearer would be good
   ... we don't want to say too much on how locales are used

   francois: I agree
   ... let's just say "it varies", and the application needs to find
   out how to deal with it
   ... we will end up with examples saying e..g "the country is not
   everything!"
   ... if a user contacts a server, there is an initial request
   ... you have to start from that point and use the right language
   ... the language again is in the center

   mark: language is the core of any notion of locale

   francois: is there any other stuff than language which is always
   available?

idna issue

   mark: I looked it over
   ... the klensin document was seriously flawed

   felix: we could reply as a group, or as w3c liaison

   mark: I would suggest i18n core looks over the proposal, and w3c
   sees if you reply as liaison to ietf

   francois: why are they excluding so much?

   mark: the ietf draft is very suspicious on combining characters. you
   can't write e.g. indic language without these
   ... the approach is very euro centric

   francois: is the appraoch in principle o.k., i.e. to say what is
   included, and not what is excluded?

   mark: at least the unicode identifiers should be available
   ... they are removing lots of stuff in response to not clearly
   defined problems

   francois: the underlying problem is security, right?

   mark: excluding symbols like a "heart" does not help security

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Felix to send a note to the RFC editor on the
   reference to the location of BCP 47 - RFCs [recorded in
   [24]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-i18ncore-minutes.html#action08]
   [NEW] ACTION: Felix to to classify open LTLI issues
   [NEW] ACTION: All to read Marks comments on IDNA issues

   [PENDING] ACTION: everybody to look for issues in
   [25]http://www.w3.org/TR/timezone recorded in
   [26]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-i18ncore-minutes.html#action01]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Felix to look for possible participants for the ws
   i18n work [recorded in
   [27]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-i18ncore-minutes.html#action02]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Felix to write a mail about possibility for SVG
   tiny specific IRI tests to martin and the i18n core list [recorded
   in [28]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-i18ncore-minutes.html#action03]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Francois to build a current issues list on charmod
   norm [recorded in
   [29]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-i18ncore-minutes.html#action06]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Francois to give input to wiki for the LTLI
   summary [recorded in
   [30]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-i18ncore-minutes.html#action04]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Francois to reply to Schema WG on normalization
   issue. [recorded in
   [31]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-i18ncore-minutes.html#action05]

     [25] http://www.w3.org/TR/timezone

   [DONE] ACTION: Felix to update the review radar [recorded in
   [32]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-i18ncore-minutes.html#action07]

   [End of minutes]
     _________________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [33]scribe.perl version 1.127
    ([34]CVS log)
    $Date: 2006/10/24 15:21:55 $

     [33] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [34] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Tuesday, 24 October 2006 15:22:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 1 October 2008 10:18:51 GMT