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

2005-10-19 18n its minutes

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 00:28:15 +0900
To: "public-i18n-its@w3.org" <public-i18n-its@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.sywfxdl0x1753t@ibm-60d333fc0ec>
Hi all,

The minutes of today's meeting are at

http://www.w3.org/2005/10/19-i18n-minutes.html

and attachted to this mail.

Best,

Felix
   [1]W3C

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

                              i18n ITS WG

19 Oct 2005

   [2]Agenda

      [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-its/2005OctDec/0033.html

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/19-i18n-irc

Attendees

   Present
          Andrzej, Christian, Damian, Felix, Goutam, Sebastian, Yves

   Regrets
          Diane, Richard

   Chair
          Yves

   Scribe
          Felix

Contents

     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]Welcome a new member!
         2. [6]action item
         3. [7]discussions on Scoping
         4. [8]change the requirement document
         5. [9]Note on extensibility
         6. [10]about definitions
         7. [11]other business
     * [12]Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________

Welcome a new member!

   YS: Damian, please tell us about you.

   DA: Hi everybody
   ... I will replace Tim Foster
   ... I worked at Sun for 5-6 year in l10n area
   ... I am the lead of Sun l10n ??? desktop
   ... currently I'm working on openoffice

action item

   <scribe> ACTION: FS to look at the other requirements which are
   mentioned in the scope wiki. If scope is accepted, put them into ODD
   (DONE) [recorded in
   [13]http://www.w3.org/2005/10/19-i18n-minutes.html#action01]

   <scribe> ACTION: FS to summarize the discussion of the scope wiki,
   look at root elements with / without children, and if there are no
   more comments, to put it into ODD. (DONE) [recorded in
   [14]http://www.w3.org/2005/10/19-i18n-minutes.html#action02]

   <scribe> ACTION: Put extensibility in the WD in the way discussed in
   last teleconference. (PENDING) [recorded in
   [15]http://www.w3.org/2005/10/19-i18n-minutes.html#action03]

   <scribe> ACTION: CL to use ODD to specify the indicator of
   translatability implementation. (Waiting for progress on the ODD
   conversion) (PENDING) [recorded in
   [16]http://www.w3.org/2005/10/19-i18n-minutes.html#action04]

   <scribe> ACTION: SR to put a comment on Nested element req
   <[17]http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0509ReqNestedElements>. (PENDING)
   [recorded in
   [18]http://www.w3.org/2005/10/19-i18n-minutes.html#action05]

     [17] http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0509ReqNestedElements%3E.

   SR: did the action item on writing odd2xmlspec

   <scribe> ACTION: YS to ask RI for techniques template. (PENDING)
   [recorded in
   [19]http://www.w3.org/2005/10/19-i18n-minutes.html#action06]

discussions on Scoping

   [20]http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0509SpecScoping

     [20] http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0509SpecScoping

   YS: I thougth it was well done
   ... we get a better idea of how it will work
   ... I had some comments, but you answered that in a mail
   ... CL had some comments as well

   CL: I saw one of my comments generated some questions
   ... this summary indicates the progress we are making
   ... in a comment, I had a reference to xsl-fo
   ... I meant that computation of scoping is s.t. different
   ... xsl has s.t. explicit how a value should be computed

   a maybe useful xml schema data type:

   <xs:simpleType name="scopeInline">

   <xs:restriction base="xs:string">

   <xs:pattern value="

   (child::.+)|

   (descendant::.+)|

   (descendant-or-self::.+)|

   (\.//.+)|

   (attribute::/.+)|

   (@.+)|

   (name\(\)=.+)"/>

   </xs:restriction>

   </xs:simpleType>

   <GoutamSaha> Hi everybody

   SR: this might be an unhealthy route to go

   SR: some users might have other use cases

   AZ: there is an error in the attribute ??? in the WD, I will fix
   that

   SR: if you want to check the XPath
   ... you could also use schematron, and go down the NDVL route
   ... maybe your example is a better example in the non-normative part
   of the spec

   FS: that is a good idea
   ... "Summary of the scope requirement" is what we are talking about

   YS: our solution would be translate "yes" or "no"
   ... all the examples we used so far are a single set of values
   ... but we have not touched the case of constraints

   FS: we could express that with the XLink way, using attributes

   YS: as for ruby, we don't define ruby ourselves
   ... why not defining an enclosing ruby tag?

   FS: this is because of text in attributes
   ... but if this solution does not work, people who read the wd will
   tell us

   <scribe> ACTION: FS to produce an odd for the scoping element, with
   the complete structure of the wd [recorded in
   [21]http://www.w3.org/2005/10/19-i18n-minutes.html#action07]

   SR: one point is whether you want to mandate XPath 2.0?

   FS: sorry, XPath 1.0 is feasible as well

change the requirement document

   YS: FS had the concern to discuss solution in the req document

   FS: this is my mail:
   [22]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-its/2005OctDec/0
   037.html
   ... I can do the changes in the req document fast

     [22] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-its/2005OctDec/0037.html

   YS: I can try to help you with that fast, but I will be gone most of
   next week and the end of this week
   ... let's talk about that offline

Note on extensibility

   YS: we agreed that extensibility should not be tackeled right now,
   and that we would put that into the wd

   <scribe> ACTION: FS to put as many as possible requirements into the
   tag set working draft [recorded in
   [23]http://www.w3.org/2005/10/19-i18n-minutes.html#action08]

   YS: other comments on this topic?

about definitions

   YS: we had some feedback, but we did not follow up with that very
   well
   ... about i18n, l10n, and so on.
   ... we had some comments from Mark Davis and Adisson Phillips
   ... is there s.t. we could use in our documents?

   <YvesS> [24]http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0504ReqKeyDefinitions

     [24] http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0504ReqKeyDefinitions

   FS: currently discussed between the WGs, but no solution so far

   YS: do we have to refer to the req document from the spec document?

   FS: might be useful, but is not mandatory

other business

   YS: the f2f meeting, is the 6-7-8 of December

   <YvesS> [25]http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0504ReqKeyDefinitions

     [25] http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0504ReqKeyDefinitions

   YS: will be somewhere near Oxford

   logistics page:
   [26]http://www.w3.org/International/its/ftf-200512-Didcot.html

     [26] http://www.w3.org/International/its/ftf-200512-Didcot.html

   YS: we have to check hotels
   ... The Upper Reaches, Abingdon
   ... that is our first choice, cf.
   [27]http://www.superbreak.com/home.cfm?GroupID=4003&content=hotel
   ... lunch is not provided
   ... we need the list of people who will come
   ... I'll try to start an agenda soon
   ... any other business?

     [27] http://www.superbreak.com/home.cfm?GroupID=4003&content=hotel

   regrets for next week: YS

   FS will chair

   Damian: I will tell you next week if I can participate in the f2f

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: FS to produce an odd for the scoping element, with the
   complete structure of the wd [recorded in
   [28]http://www.w3.org/2005/10/19-i18n-minutes.html#action07]
   [NEW] ACTION: FS to put as many as possible requirements into the
   tag set working draft [recorded in
   [29]http://www.w3.org/2005/10/19-i18n-minutes.html#action08]

   [PENDING] ACTION: CL to use ODD to specify the indicator of
   translatability implementation. (Waiting for progress on the ODD
   conversion) [recorded in
   [30]http://www.w3.org/2005/10/19-i18n-minutes.html#action04]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Put extensibility in the WD in the way discussed
   in last teleconference. [recorded in
   [31]http://www.w3.org/2005/10/19-i18n-minutes.html#action03]
   [PENDING] ACTION: SR to put a comment on Nested element req <<a
   href="http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0509ReqNestedElements">http://esw.w
   3.org/topic/its0509ReqNestedElements>. [recorded in
   [32]http://www.w3.org/2005/10/19-i18n-minutes.html#action05]
   [PENDING] ACTION: YS to ask RI for techniques template. [recorded in
   [33]http://www.w3.org/2005/10/19-i18n-minutes.html#action06]

   [DONE] ACTION: FS to look at the other requirements which are
   mentioned in the scope wiki. If scope is accepted, put them into ODD
   [recorded in
   [34]http://www.w3.org/2005/10/19-i18n-minutes.html#action01]
   [DONE] ACTION: FS to summarize the discussion of the scope wiki,
   look at root elements with / without children, and if there are no
   more comments, to put it into ODD. [recorded in
   [35]http://www.w3.org/2005/10/19-i18n-minutes.html#action02]

   [End of minutes]
     _________________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [36]scribe.perl version 1.127
    ([37]CVS log)
    $Date: 2005/10/19 15:09:11 $

     [36] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [37] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Wednesday, 19 October 2005 15:28:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:43:06 UTC