W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-its@w3.org > April to June 2005

Minutes 2005-06-29: ITS teleconference

From: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@translate.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 18:06:45 +0200
To: <public-i18n-its@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20050629160706.AA8C5C161@postfix3-2.free.fr>
Minutes 2005-06-29: ITS teleconference

ATTENDEES:

- TF: Tim Foster (Sun)
- RI: Richard Ishida (W3C)
- MI: Masaki Itagaki (Invited Expert)
- CL: Christian Lieske (SAP)
- FS: Felix Sasaki (W3C)
- YS: Yves Savourel (ENLASO)

REGRETS:

- DS: Diane Stoick (Boeing)
- AZ: Andrzej Zydron (Invited Expert)

AGENDA:

<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-its/2005AprJun/0056.html>


=== PREVIOUS ACTION ITEMS:

1. RI to ask to the appropriate W3C contact how to handle feedback from non-WG-members.
--> Next teleconference.


2. RI to contact person for Atom.
--> Next teleconference.


3. YS to clean up "Indicator of constraints"
Done: <http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0506ReqConstraints>
If no more comments, this item will move to working draft next week.


4. YS to send comments to FS on the draft paper (before Friday Tokyo time).
Done. FS also posted a final version of the paper here:
<http://www.w3.org/International/2005/05/EML2005sasa0411-final.html>
Tomorrow, FS will remove the draft before the conference.
Make local copy if you want to keep the paper until the conference is passed.


5. AZ to address comments on the "Requirement for Metrics"
<http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0505WordCount>
--> Next teleconference.


6. TF to clean up "Span-like element"
Done: <http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0503ReqSpan>
TF to restructure the item to make it fit the latest form (summary, etc.)


7. CL to try to add a parts about processing requirements for the "Localization Notes"
Done: <http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0505ReqLocNotes>
CL noted he used the Quick Guidelines section for this since we don't know yet if we will have a special section of processing
expectations.


8. All to notify FS and YS about face-to-face meeting attendance ("yes", "not sure yet but probably", "not sure yet and it doesn't
look good", "won't be able") with dates if possible.
FS said we are basically set for the meeting (meeting room, access, etc. are reserved).
YS noted there is a page now available on the ITS site for the meeting information.
<http://www.w3.org/International/its/ftf-200509-Sophia.html>
FS or YS to update this page whenever we have new information on logistics.
RI suggested that a possible alternative to an hotel close to the ERCIM would be one in Antibes (if someone has a car rental), so
it's close to restaurants, etc.


9. YS to post a note to the XLIFF TC about reviewing the current requirements. (action item forgotten in the minutes).
Done. No feedback so far.



=== DISCUSSION ON THE REQUIREMENTS:

- We discussed FS slides for the Team project review (that takes place tomorrow).
<http://www.w3.org/2005/06/i18n-its-pr/>
TF noted that it would be better to use a different example for an element not to translate than the <programlisting> element. He
posted a suggestion for FS since (<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-its/2005AprJun/0066.html>).
CL posted a PDF file with examples <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-its/2005AprJun/0065.html> and commented them. FS
to try to integrate some suggestions from it.
RI noted that the slides should point to the requirements list. He also noted that it would be good to make a distinction between
localization requirements (like 'what to translate') and internationalization requirements (like the ruby notation). He suggested
some examples for the latter and will post them.
YS asked what will be the output of the project review.
RI explained that the review was not part of the document formal process, just a Team-private discussion. The WG will get no formal
feedback, but should be able to get some informal advices and suggestions.


- We discussed the Requirement document schedule
YS noted that we were about 1 month late on our goal.
FS mentioned that we could maybe produce a more rough version of the Requirement, and start with that.
RI noted that having a solid foundation was very important.
MI asked whether we had to get all done in the first WD. We could get some done, publish that and move on, completing the
Requirements as we go.
RI explained the first WD process.
The outcome of the discussion from all is that should try to get a first set of requirements item done, and publish it, and update
it as we go. We would keep using the wiki pages to make comments/changes and take snap-shots of the progress in the Requirement
document.
YS to redo the work item list by status so it's easier to see on which items we should concentrate.



=== OTHER BUSINESS:

- Next teleconference is Wednesday Jul-06 at 14:00 UTC, IRC: #i18n.



=== ACTION ITEMS:

01. RI to ask to the appropriate W3C contact how to handle feedback from non-WG-members.

02. RI to contact person for Atom.

03. AZ to address comments on the "Requirement for Metrics"
<http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0505WordCount>

04. TF to re-structure "Span-like element"
<http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0503ReqSpan>

05. YS to re-order the work items and keep preparing the document with the items that are at WD state.


Kenavo,
-yves
Received on Wednesday, 29 June 2005 16:07:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:12:45 GMT