W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-geo@w3.org > July 2004

Minutes: GEO telecon 040721

From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 12:36:36 +0100
To: "GEO" <public-i18n-geo@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20040728113636.059E24F109@homer.w3.org>

MINUTES: I18N GEO TF telcon, 2004-07-21 at 14:00 UTC/GMT, 7am Seattle, 10am Boston, 15:00 London, 16:00 Paris, midnight Melbourne

Attendees: Richard Ishida (Chair I18N GEO), Deborah Cawkwell (BBC World Service), Andrew Cunningham (State Library of Victoria), Tex Texin (XenCraft) 

Info Share


Proposal accepted to change time from next week to 17:00 UTC/GMT, 10am Seattle, 12noon Boston, 18:00 London, 19:00 Paris. RI to send a note out re new meeting time.

Review of GEO Work Items: 
-           http://www.w3.org/International/2003/plan.html


-           Re-chartering (late addition to Agenda)


            Read by Deborah, Andrew & Tex. RI particularly wanted to discuss deliverables. DC asked for more info about DTD aspect. Previously RI considered what might be useful to put in a DTD for localisation purposes. RI heard from Yves Savourel (YS) that LISA thinking about putting something together along those lines.   There is material published which describes requirements [http://people.w3.org/rishida/localizable-dtds/] Could be developed as a W3C document. Could develop guidelines for DTD & schema authors and lead to further steps - standardardised tag set. All helps with the localisation of XML docs. RI suggested a workshop to discuss. This would require involvement of localisation tool vendors. Work could involve, for example, means of telling translators a piece of text should not be translated. Could use attribute or XPath to identify portions of the document that shouldn't be translated . Good for localisation vendors because it reduceds the requirement to re-invent wheel. Appropriate work for W3C. Would need group membership for localisation vendors, otherwise it couldn't be done. Various expressions of interest from outside WG. TT added that as well as localisation tool developers, we might want to reference content providers working with multiple languages; DC agreed - content delivery people are developing their own tag sets currently. RI said not trying to be exclusive - will add content providers as one of several groups. 

            TT suggested maybe can't be done until charter approved. TT reported a while ago there was a workshop with very key people on localisation. He suggested that the workshop be opened up to localisation people and XML people. Discussion about the most useful point to hold a workshop: RI felt workshop should be used to refine ideas; TT to brainstorm. RI felt that a F2F meeting could achieve this. Question of gathering the right people. RI felt there was already a lot of available information. Comments on other deliverables. 

            New charter would involve more more formality around tests; bit ad hoc currently.  RI asked if anything missing from this charter.            

            DC asked re voting and being chorate, which had not previously been an issue for the group. RI replied that for other groups where there was a crunch point that they can't get around/facilitate, the voting was used to decide. It is not something that really applies in our case, although a vote was taken for character model. The vote issue is a boilerplate part of W3C charters.

            DC asked about working with core and liaison with non-core issues. WAI and CSS liaison would happen directly from GEO group, comments to other W3C standards would happen via the I18N Core WG. 


-           Language techniques doc 

            RI said this will now be discussed every week. He would like to close by the renewal of charter. There are three to close if we are lucky: language of content, char sets and encoding, bi-di. What do we need to do to finalise? We can always have additional versions, but would like to be complete in terms of usefulness. In terms of language attribute, what needs to be done? In terms of content, missing specifying the language of the link destination. RI requested group to send info by email. Discussion about hreflang. RI said he was not sure whether it's useful or nor. Also missing, is text needed for multi-lingual documents where documents have more than one language, typically documents with parallel text. The primary difference is that there is no language in HTML tag. RI also raised issue that for title elements, can't have more than one language or more than one title element. For meta description and keywords, there can be multiple with appropriate attributes. TT said that meta declaration is about language, but it's also about target audience, which may reflect on content, not the language of the content, there is a need to ref what the content is about. RI felt TT's points were addressed in the FAQ (http://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-http-and-lang). Referring to FAQ, TT asked if this is a suggestion that this group came to, rather than adopting practises used elsewhere. RI didn't find anything else available, did send out to i18n lists for review. TT commented that there is nothing about inheritance. RI said he had done a lot of testing, spoke with Jungshik who does work in this area. TT asked if this was re-interpreting the standard?  RI suggested checking standard & emailing with any feedback. 

            RI said returning to techniques document, we need all tests in place and to run them for UAs we're talking about. RI to talk to DC about tests there are. RI would like to change the title and would make a suggestion. RI requested suggestion for any other references: he had added a lot already, which took a lot of time. If any other would be useful, please forward. 

            DC mentioned base browsers problem, which was much higher than for the BBC standards. RI said they were chosen for resource level available in the group. 

            RI suggested it would be useful to have all techniques available in the table of contents list. 

            RI requested ideas for href and link stuff and that people feed through any other small improvements by email, then we can close & move on to other documents.


-           Article: An Introduction to Multilingual Web Addresses

            '.JP' and upper/lower case. DC had circulated around BBC WS NM developers. 
		RI requested that people send other comments by email.





See also GEO work items: http://www.w3.org/International/2003/plan.html


Deborah Cawkwell
Senior Software Engineer 
BBC World Service New Media
707 NE Bush House
Tel: 0207 557 3763
Fax: 0207 836 4332


http://www.bbc.co.uk/ - World Wide Wonderland

This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain
personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically
If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. 
Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in
reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the
BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. 
Further communication will signify your consent to this. 
Received on Wednesday, 28 July 2004 07:37:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:28:01 UTC