W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-its@w3.org > April to June 2006

[I18N ITS editor's call] Teleconference Minutes 2006-04-07

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 12:02:13 +0900
Message-ID: <443727B5.8040004@w3.org>
To: public-i18n-its@w3.org
... are at


and below as text.

- Felix


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

                i18n ITS working group (editor's call)

7 Apr 2006

   See also: [2]IRC log

      [2] http://www.w3.org/2006/04/07-i18nits-irc


          Christian, Felix, Yves




     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]christian: change report
         2. [5]section on "basic concepts"
         3. [6]versioning issue
     * [7]Summary of Action Items

christian: change report

   christian: I integreated all "water proove" comments Yves made



   (above are comments from Yves)

   christian: I did proposal 1, 2, 3, but not 4

   yves: 4 was just a suggestion

   christian: I suggest "content-related tools"

   yves: fine with me

   christian: 5, the "knowledge-workers"

   yves: it sounds strange

   Felix: I have heard it only in German
   ... how about "content producers"?

   christian: +1

   yves: +1

   christian: comment 6

   yves: not important, that's fine

   christian: on 7: grammatical correctness?

   felix: we don't have keep track of it now

   christian: remark 8: I would keep it

   yves: +1





   yves: example 2 seems incorrect

   felix: its:translateSelector="//dt"/
   ... maybe fits better

   yves: translate is still set to "yes"

   christian: Yves comment 11:

   [[Just an observation. To some degree the text above make it sounds
   like that internationalization is limited to allow

   localization. Maybe some small rewording may inject the aspect of
   allowing content in any language (maybe after this draft is done)


   yves: i18n allows to have content in different languages
   ... which is not covered by the definition

   christian: how should that be reworded?

   yves: let's see what others think
   ... as for 13: again a lot about localization
   ... the formatting has some additional line feeds

   christian: how about the example about "in the schema"?

   felix: that is left from the "schemaRule" area

   christian: how about schema developers?

   yves: examples might be very complex
   ... schema developers can do very different things
   ... e.g. mapping ITS via rules, or integrating markup declarations
   in the schema

   felix: how about a pointer to section 7 / the separate document

   yves: +1

   christian: +1

section on "basic concepts"

   <YvesS> para above Example 9 "thetranslate attribute" is missing a

   christian: made some minor changes

   yves: there are some spacing issues
   ... maybe due to XML Spy
   ... some markup for code?

   felix: a <code> element would help
   ... "its:translate='no'"

   yves: "in the example translateSelector" should be with "selector"
   ... I'll review section "basic concepts"
   ... and write a mail to the list
   ... as for examples in that section: they seem to be very basic
   ... e.g. they are not valid, e.g. "..."

   felix: how about the difference between pointing and adding
   ... is that good here, or too specific?

   christian: we say in this section that we have a global approach and
   a local one
   ... and the selection

   felix: definition in the normative part:
   ... you can use that to make the non-normative explanation
   ... so we can close the three bugs on these changes?


   christian: yes

versioning issue

   yves: we have to say: is it o.k. to have one or more rules elements
   in one document?
   ... if yes, we get some problems
   ... if we have only on rules element per file, things get easier

   christian: +1

   felix: +1

   yves: all agree it is a bad idea

   <scribe> ACTION: Yves to send an action item about the "only" one
   rules element per file topic [recorded in

   yves: we had a consensus on the position

   felix: sorry for the confusion of my explanation, I would go for the
   version element at the root element

   christian: as for an external file
   ... what would it contain?

   <chriLi> <its:rules xmlns:its="[13]http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its"

     [13] http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its
     [14] http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink

   <chriLi> xlink:href="myRules.xml">

   christian: what may be in "myRules.xml"?

   yves: somewhere in that file there is an rules element

   christian: the top element of that file could be rules

   yves: that is a specific case of a generic case
   ... that approach good for extensibility

   christian: I would make clear that "rules" does not has to be the
   top level element of the external file
   ... it would make things clearer

   yves: so we resolved "linking" and "multiple rules" issues, for the
   three of us

   felix: so we integrate that into the draft

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Yves to send an action item about the "only" one rules
   element per file topic [recorded in
   [End of minutes]

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [16]scribe.perl version 1.127
    ([17]CVS log)
    $Date: 2006/04/08 02:58:23 $

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

Received on Saturday, 8 April 2006 03:02:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:43:07 UTC