W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-its@w3.org > April to June 2007

Re: I18N ITS Teleconference Minutes 2007-05-23

From: Najib Tounsi <ntounsi@emi.ac.ma>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 16:34:48 +0000
Message-ID: <46546D28.9050603@emi.ac.ma>
To: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@translate.com>
CC: public-i18n-its@w3.org

Yves Savourel wrote:
> Subject: ITS Teleconf - Wednesday May-23-2007
> =============================================
>
> The IRC recoding of the minutes is here:
>
> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-its/2007AprJun/0037.html
> IRC Log: http://www.w3.org/2007/05/23-i18nits-minutes.html
>
> Present: Jirka (IRC), Christian, Yves
> Regrets: Andrzej, Felix, Sebastian
>
>
> === Review of the action items:
>
> Nobody had much time to do a lot of their action items.
>
>
> -01 [NEW]: Felix to check language data type in XML Schema http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#language
> PENDING
>
> -02 [NEW]: Felix to contact JIS people in Japan about possiblity of "ITS as JIS"
> PENDING
>
> -03 [NEW]: Felix to find IBM contact for ITS
> PENDING
>
> -04 [NEW]: Felix to tweak XSLT to generate automatic example numbering and titleing like "Example 7: Better design"
> PENDING
>
> -05 [NEW]: Felix to update status section for each new BP WD publicatation with 1) BP which need review and 2) BP which we think are
> finished., Ongoing AI
> PENDING
>
> -06 [NEW]: Jirka to draft a mail for contacting editors vendors for ITS
> PENDING
>
> -07 [NEW]: Richard to add more rationale to the "why" section of BP4
> PENDING
>
> -08 [NEW]: Richard to tweak the "Why doing this" statement from BP 5
> PENDING
>
> -09 [NEW]: Sebastian to consider whether we need question marks after "Why doing this" statements in the BPs
> DISCARDED: Yves will ask to handy native speakers.
>
> -10 [NEW]: yves to check the whole doc for consistency for "attribute" vs "attribute value"
> PENDING
>
> -11 [NEW]: Yves to contact Diane and to check her availability for editing of the BP document
> PENDING
>
> -12 [NEW]: Yves to provide mail about applying ITS in OpenOffice
> PENDING
>
> -13 [NEW]: Yves to rewrite the description of example 11
> PENDING
>
> -14 [NEW]: Yves to send mail about f2f meeting in Autumn
> Done: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-its/2007AprJun/0033.html
>
> -15 [NEW]: Yves to talk to Philippe Rouquet about "ITS as ISO" topic
> Done. Waiting for answer.
>  
> -16 [NEW]: Christian to draft general section about extending/customizing schemas
> PENDING
>
> -17 [NEW]: Christian to provide sample BP for further discussion.
> Done during f2f.
>
> -18 [NEW]: Christian to rework 4.1 and 4.1.1
> PENDING
>
> -19 [NEW]: Felix to ask Najib about correcet rendering of example 4
> Done. Najib noted that we could just do like we did for the example in the Rec document.
>   
I joined on IRC, but may be it was too late. Sorry.

In fact  my opinion is that (bidi) rendering shoudn't matter when you 
show source code. Not only it depends on the TexteEditor/AuthoringTool, 
but also on the user's preferences and setting. Unfortunatly, actually 
editing tools don't permit users to do such setting, e.g. override bidi 
rendering with rtl+ltr  texts in source mode.
But this is another issue.

Najib

>  
> -20 [NEW]: Felix to contact Najib and Felix about BP 2
> PENDING
>
> -21 [NEW]: Felix to provide W3C document lisense to Jirka
> PENDING
>
> -22 [NEW]: Felix to sort out XHTML issues
> PENDING
>
> -23 [NEW]: Jirka and Yves to add conformance statements to the modularization sections
> PENDING
>
> -24 [NEW]: Jirka to fix DocBook issues mentioned by Christian
> PENDING
>
> -25 [NEW]: Jirka to integrate the DocBook section into the BP document
> PENDING
>
> -26 [NEW]: Yves to check whether Diane wants to continue be co-editor
> PENDING
>
> -27 [NEW]: Yves to collect all examples from BP and put them into testsuite
> PENDING
>
> -28 [NEW]: Yves to create draft of CDATA section
> PENDING
>
> -29 [NEW]: Yves to find new formulation for example 29
> PENDING
>
> -30 [NEW]: Yves to rework some BP according Christian structure
> PENDING
>  
> -31 [NEW]: editors of BP document to change the descriptions of ITS+existing schemas to say that there is no need to have ITS
> attributes for existing markup, and have association rules instead.
> PENDING
>
> -32 [NEW]: Felix to prepare access for Jirka for the BP directory
> Done. Jirka has access.
>
> -33 [NEW]: Yves to contact some ISO people about the "ITS as ISO standard" topic.
> DSCARDED: Same as #15.
>  
> -34 [PENDING]: Everybody to look at SPARQL and the SPARQL result format for potential ITS review.
> PENDING
>
> -36 [PENDING]: Everybody to look into XLIFF 1.2, TMX 2, SRX 2
> Christian requested 2 more day for the proposed TMX2 comments
> (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its/2007AprJun/0029.html)
>
> -37 [PENDING]: Everybody to think about the idea: consider to have all existing schemas "ITS+..." with only markup which is not
> already in the schema, e.g. "ITS+XHTML" without its:dir? And have a general guideline to do that for existing schemas.
> Done. Led to #31
>
> -38 [PENDING]: Yves to look on Atom and the bidi attribute and possibly ITS in general.
> PENDING
>
>
>
> === Discussions
>
> -- Reviewing W3C Work for ITS
>
> 2 new: Xpath Full Text, and Web services Addressing.
> CL: Xpath Full Text has probably i18n-related feature.
> Need Felix guidance for WS adressing.
>
> Action: Felix to provide feedback on whether we need to look at XPath 2.0 Req/Use case and Web Service addressing.
>
>
> -- Best Practices Working Draft
>
> YS: Latest version is here: http://www.w3.org/International/its/techniques/its-techniques.html 
> We need to do our action items before we can discuss anything.
>
>
> -- Other Business
>
> CL: Any feedback from ITS presentation at Xtech?
>
> JK: Good to see application using ITS.
>
> YS: Got input from someone from the European trademarks bureau: was interested in using it. Someone from Business Object was also
> interested and noted the absence of a data category about 'preserve or not spaces'.
>
> YS: Will write a report on the conference and will post in in member list as FYI.
>
> -- Next Face to face:
>
> YS: Jirka has checked possibility: it would be OK.
> We need to make sure Andrzej and Sebastian have a chance to think about it. If no one disagree we could probably make it official
> next meeting.
>
> CL: An idea, maybe we could have half a day reserved for tool vendors o discuss implementation?
>
> YS: sounds like a good idea. Will discuss it when preparing the agenda.
>
>
> Meeting adjourned.
> -end-
>
>
>
>   
Received on Wednesday, 23 May 2007 16:35:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:12:49 GMT