W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org > November 2014

[Minutes] ITS IG Call 2014-11-10

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 18:05:02 +0100
Message-Id: <89DA4505-6349-43EC-B6EB-2B1793845DA0@w3.org>
To: public-i18n-its-ig <public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org>
See
http://www.w3.org/2014/11/10-i18nits-minutes.html
and below as text. Most important: for progressing with the ITS XLIFF mapping for XLIFF 2.1, we need to continue via mail in the next weeks. Next call will be 8 December, as a status check.

Best,

Felix

   [1]W3C

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

                               - DRAFT -

                                 ITS IG

10 Nov 2014

   [2]Agenda

      [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its-ig/2014Nov/0020.html

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2014/11/10-i18nits-irc

Attendees

   Present
          dF, Yves, philr, felix, Ankit

   Regrets
          Christian, Jörg

   Chair
          felix

   Scribe
          fsasaki

Contents

     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]its in xliff module time line
         2. [6]progress and next call
         3. [7]ITS module namespace
         4. [8]XLIFF test outupt
         5. [9]ITS preserve space and language information
         6. [10]Provenance and change track module
         7. [11]loc world
         8. [12]General: example XLIFF file with ITS2 metadata
         9. [13]aob
     * [14]Summary of Action Items
     __________________________________________________________

   <scribe> scribe: fsasaki

its in xliff module time line

   yves: timeline for delivery of its module
   ... felix noted, we don't have much time to finish things
   ... we need to finish both spec + implementations by end of
   December
   ... looking at what we need to do that is very hard
   ... there may be three options
   ... 1) postpone release
   ... 2) not put ITS in that release
   ... 3) have only parts of ITS in that module

   david: we should have a concrete spec by Christmas
   ... implementations can come later
   ... during February
   ... if you start public reviews in January, you have at least
   60 days to provide implementations

   yves: our schedule is based on a single review?

   david: yes
   ... if we need more than one review it will automatically
   postpone anyway

   yves: a really hard schedule

   david: I will have now more time and transfer categories, lot
   of this is putting attributes in module

   yves: there are data categories that we have not even discussed
   yet

   david: right
   ... one is the note, but that is done, right?
   ... it is not on the wiki, but I made a draft based on 1.2
   ... there might be roadblocks, but I should manage to transfer
   stuff by christmas
   ... postponing module for next release is not really an option,
   this is the main feature for xliff 2.1
   ... can work on this during christmas break
   ... we can still send spec for review during january

   felix: if you need help with any editing please let me know (no
   need to be an editor)

   david: good to know that you are ready to help, need to see
   myself if there is stuff to give to you etc.
   ... work on docbook template is straightforward

progress and next call

   next call 8 december, we need to make progress via mail, then
   status check on 8 december

   <scribe> ACTION: david to make status check on 8 december call
   [recorded in
   [15]http://www.w3.org/2014/11/10-i18nits-minutes.html#action01]

   <trackbot> 'david' is an ambiguous username. Please try a
   different identifier, such as family name or username (e.g.,
   dfilip, dlewis6).

   <scribe> ACTION: dfilip to make status check on 8 december call
   [recorded in
   [16]http://www.w3.org/2014/11/10-i18nits-minutes.html#action02]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-55 - Make status check on 8 december
   call [on David Filip - due 2014-11-17].

   [17]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its-ig/2014
   Nov/0020.html

     [17] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its-ig/2014Nov/0020.html

ITS module namespace

   [18]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its-ig/2014
   Nov/0013.html

     [18] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its-ig/2014Nov/0013.html

   yves: we will use a single namespace for the module
   ... the URI is made from the other (xliff) modules
   ... the question is arising for the detault prefix for that
   namespace
   ... by convention we use the prefix for the same identifier
   ... david things we should use ITS, I think we should use
   something else because ITS is taken

   <dF> urn:oasis:names:tc:xliff:its:2.1

   david: good summary
   ... above is URI that is on the draft
   ... argument to use something else than ITS is not to confuse
   things
   ... prefix appears on a few places

   <dF> its:

   david: can also appear in values as an authorative namespace

   <dF> its:

   <dF> mtc:

   david: we can have values from various modules

   <dF> msft:

   <dF> subState

   david: all occurences should use the same short cut
   ... question is: is ITS taken because it is used by w3c rec?
   ... or is it ok to use it in xliff?
   ... not sure if it matters - what is the danger?
   ... your extractor needs to follow the mapping anyway

   [19]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its-ig/2014
   Nov/0023.html

     [19] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its-ig/2014Nov/0023.html

   felix: see above mail for technical reaons where prefix matters

   [20]http://www.w3.org/International/its/itstagset/verbatim.xsl

     [20] http://www.w3.org/International/its/itstagset/verbatim.xsl

   yves: ITS is default prefix for ITS in general
   ... we should respect the convention
   ... there is nothing that prevents us for using a different
   namespace

   david: xits has a private connotation
   ... the other namespaces are not based on a w3c namespace
   ... itsm is a good idea, it indicates "its module"

   felix: how to move forward with discussion?

   david: yves copied xliff TC on discussion, they will decide
   before next call
   ... xslt example is probably the most convincing
   ... as yves said there are many options, main are: the same
   "its" or something else, something short like itsm - for some
   reasons itsx or xits are not good
   ... I could live with its + s.t. else

XLIFF test outupt

   <dF> itsm

   [21]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its-ig/2014
   Nov/0000.html

     [21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its-ig/2014Nov/0000.html

   <dF> meaning its module

   [22]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its-ig/2014
   Nov/0016.html

     [22] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its-ig/2014Nov/0016.html

   [23]http://okapi.opentag.com/snapshots/okapi-xliffLib_all-platf
   orms_1.1-SNAPSHOT.zip

     [23] http://okapi.opentag.com/snapshots/okapi-xliffLib_all-platforms_1.1-SNAPSHOT.zip

   felix: any open questions related to the output?

   yves: need to define the line break type + encoding
   ... having the same one would be useful
   ... need to start producing the output
   ... what we need to produce to make progress:
   ... 1) ITS rules for the mapping
   ... 2) write algorithm that felix, fredrick etc. talked about,
   how to convert an original file to work with ITS proceccing,
   e.g. deleting markers etc.
   ... 3) after that it is matter of processing things

   <scribe> ACTION: felix to do write up of processing ITS+XLIFF
   files [recorded in
   [24]http://www.w3.org/2014/11/10-i18nits-minutes.html#action03]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-56 - Do write up of processing
   its+xliff files [on Felix Sasaki - due 2014-11-17].

   david: need to define generic rules file, and 2) the algorithm
   ... the generic file that would go for all generic ITS
   processors
   ... makes sense to have rules file associated with an XLIFF
   file that does not have the module

   yves: annotators reference - we could have them for all data
   categories
   ... in some case they are mandatory
   ... should we put them if they are existing, in addition to
   data category info?

   felix: if avail., should put them in the output

   yves: should we just put information for that data category

   felix: +1

   yves: and shows that the tool know inheritance etc.

ITS preserve space and language information

   [25]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its-ig/2014
   Oct/0039.html

     [25] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its-ig/2014Oct/0039.html

   [26]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its-ig/2014
   Oct/0045.html

     [26] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its-ig/2014Oct/0045.html

   felix: looking in the archive I was not sure if there is a
   clear outcome of the discussion

   yves: latest was: two additional attributes - that are part of
   the ITS module
   ... its:space and its:lang

   felix: itsm:space or itsm:lang ?

   yves: yes, if we use that prefix

   david: pretty much clear and resolved for space
   ... the lang topic: I have not done a draft yet for this one
   ... there are two options: say it is not possible to express
   inline in xliff
   ... or to introduce itsm: attribute
   ... if we use itsm: prefix
   ... the main use case of xliff is bilingual - source and target
   ... is this strictly analogical to preserve space or different?

   yves: you could have a sentence with a citation
   ... spell checking could help if language information is inline

   david: it would be non translatable with translation one
   language > other
   ... trying to thing about use cases

   discussion on citations

   yves: you don't make segementation based on lang info
   ... but if you have s.t. quoted in a language you don't segment
   it
   ... I am trying to say: language information is independent of
   segmentration, translate etc.
   ... useful e.g. for spell checker - we should try to provide it

   david: technically it can be done like space
   ... fine to handle it the same way as space
   ... enough info for doing the editing in the spec

   felix: great

Provenance and change track module

   [27]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its-ig/2014
   Oct/0034.html

     [27] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its-ig/2014Oct/0034.html

   yves: looking at ITS provenance, wondering how that relates to
   change tracking
   ... some if the info is not the same
   ... there is an action on dave lewis to look into that
   ... I tried to look at it - I don't use change tracking
   currently

   david: owner in xliff tc is ryan
   ... dave + ryan would be best team to move this forward
   ... change tracking addresses only a specific use case
   ... you can record provenance also on things that have not been
   changed
   ... we should look into mapping between them - there should be
   information from change tracking mapped via ITS rules into ITS
   provenance

   felix: not sure if it is feasible to always do that mapping

   david: there will be some 1:1 relationships between attributes

   action-9?

   <trackbot> action-9 -- David Lewis to Look at the XLIFF 2.0
   change tracking module for provenance -- due 2014-05-30 -- OPEN

   <trackbot>
   [28]http://www.w3.org/International/its/ig/track/actions/9

     [28] http://www.w3.org/International/its/ig/track/actions/9

   felix: will check with dave

loc world

   david: we can be at locworld with feisgillt again, in berlin,
   will be week of june 1st, feisgillt then june 2-3
   ... reserve the dates asap

General: example XLIFF file with ITS2 metadata

   [29]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its-ig/2014
   Oct/0033.html

     [29] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its-ig/2014Oct/0033.html

   [30]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its-ig/2014
   Oct/att-0033/ITSInXLIFFtests.zip

     [30] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its-ig/2014Oct/att-0033/ITSInXLIFFtests.zip

   yves: will update the example with invalid files as well, so
   that people can test their validation
   ... any additioal examples are welcome

aob

   <yves_> bye

   next call 8 december, let's progress via mail before

   adjourned

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: david to make status check on 8 december call
   [recorded in
   [31]http://www.w3.org/2014/11/10-i18nits-minutes.html#action01]
   [NEW] ACTION: dfilip to make status check on 8 december call
   [recorded in
   [32]http://www.w3.org/2014/11/10-i18nits-minutes.html#action02]
   [NEW] ACTION: felix to do write up of processing ITS+XLIFF
   files [recorded in
   [33]http://www.w3.org/2014/11/10-i18nits-minutes.html#action03]

   [End of minutes]
     __________________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [34]scribe.perl version
    1.140 ([35]CVS log)
    $Date: 2014-11-10 17:00:32 $
     __________________________________________________________

     [34] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [35] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

   [Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.140  of Date: 2014-11-06 18:16:30
Check for newer version at [36]http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/
scribe/

     [36] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/short/short like itsm/
Succeeded: s/topic: ITS preserve space and language information//
Succeeded: s/provide/provide it/
Found Scribe: fsasaki
Inferring ScribeNick: fsasaki
Present: dF Yves philr felix Ankit
Regrets: Christian Jörg
Agenda: [37]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its-ig/2014N
ov/0020.html
Got date from IRC log name: 10 Nov 2014
Guessing minutes URL: [38]http://www.w3.org/2014/11/10-i18nits-minutes.h
tml
People with action items: david dfilip felix

     [37] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its-ig/2014Nov/0020.html
     [38] http://www.w3.org/2014/11/10-i18nits-minutes.html


   [End of [39]scribe.perl diagnostic output]

     [39] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
Received on Monday, 10 November 2014 17:05:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:11:31 UTC