- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2012 14:54:16 +0200
- To: public-mlw-workshop <public-mlw-workshop@w3.org>
- Cc: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAL58czrTAEVTr03mnH3cWZFRsQP_thOCZ+h0b_0iE81-F6ifww@mail.gmail.com>
Dear speakers, session chairs and all participants of the MultilingualWeb workshop, in addition to the last minute details about the workshop just sent by Arle, this mail provides background to the discussions on 12-13 June. Before attending the meeting you might want t have a look at the public draft of the requirements document http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its2req-20120524/ You might also want to look at the open (and closed) issues that we have discussed in the working group https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/ This looong mail is meant to give you guidance *during the meeting* (no need to dive into this before, but feel free to do so). I have organized the issues we discussed so far around the workshop sessions. The list below is by no means "official" - it should just give you some guidance. Session chairs, please have a look at "your" session below and try to take the issues into account during the discussion. Thanks to all your efforts in advance, and see you next week in Dublin, Felix ================================================================================================== ----------------------------- TUESDAY 12 JUNE ----------------------------- 10:00 REPRESENTATION FORMATS: HTML, XML, RDFA ETC. Related issues: - "microdata mapping for our metadata for HTML5" https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/2 Topic: how should the metadata be represented in HTML5? Our conclusion is given in the "Implementation approach" section http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its2req-20120524/#Implementation_Approach - "Elements or attributes" https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/17 Topic: whether HTML elements or attributes should be used for representing the metadata. Conclusion: attributes, see the "implementation approach" section above. - "HTML legacy content" https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/19 Topic: should the metadata also be applicable for other HTML versions than HTML5? Open issue. - "Using ITS globally in HTML5" https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/20 Topic: how to use "ITS global rules" in HTML5. Proposed solution see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012May/0128.html Issue is pending review. - "Dropping RDFa as a requirement" https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/18 Topic: should we develop also an RDFa serialization of the metadata? Conclusion: we will - the serialization will be generated automatically from the HTML5 attributes, see http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its2req-20120524/#Implementation_Approach 11:15 QUALITY METADATA Related issues: none. See the related sections in the requirements document http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its2req-20120524/#Quality http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its2req-20120524/#Quality_Assurance_.28QA.29 12:00 TERMINOLOGY METADATA Related section http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its2req-20120524/#Terminology Related issues: - "What ontology should describe the metadata values (entity types)?" https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/3 Topic: should we refer to predefined entity types like http://nerd.eurecom.fr/ontology or schema.org for (automatically identified) named entities or terms? No agreement yet. Current proposal: have pointers to existing ontologies, e.g. a pointer to wordnet. See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012May/0181.html A consumer of such metadata is described at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Jun/0011.html - "Delete genre, purpose and register data category proposals" https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/11 Topic: delete above data categories since interoperable list of values are hard to define. Conclusion: none so far: see summary of discussion at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012May/0165.html 13:45 UPDATING ITS 1.0 Related section http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its2req-20120524/#Support_ITS_1.0_Data_Categories Related issues: - "Use of XPath 2.0" https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/7 Topic: ITS 1.0 says that ITS global rules allow for using XPath 1.0 or its successor. Proposal: change this to require only support for XPath 1.0, and add queryLanguage attribute for other XPath versions; see also description at http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#Support_ITS_1.0_Data_Categories 14:30 CONTENT AUTHORING REQUIREMENTS Related issues: - "Elements or attributes", see "Representation formats" session above. - "CMS related terminology: not only CMS as content" https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/21 Topic: need to clarify that CMS authored content is *one* type of content, others (e.g. XML documents, plain HTML5) is relevant too. Conclusion: clarified in the draft. - "Low level API to access CMS content" https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/1 Topic: do we need to define a low level API to access CMS content? Conclusion: needed for a specific implementation, but not in general. Issue is open since a specific implementation (Drupal based) is under development. - See also "process state" issue described for Wednesday 9:15 slot below. 16:00 LOCALIZATION REQUIREMENTS Related issues: - "id granularity and maintenance requirements and rules" https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/9 Topic: need to clarify requirements for ID values (e.g. uniqueness in one document and different versions of the document) in localization scenarios. Is there a need for a localization process specific ID attribute, see e.g. the proposal at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012May/0019.html - "Definition of target pointer and why it is needed" https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/15 Topic: "target pointer" proposal http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#targetPointer: a mechanism for documents with two or more language versions of the same text. The mechanism could be used to point to (translated) target. Main discussion point: is this mechanism really needed? See this thread http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012May/thread#msg39 - "Parameter for rules" https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/16 Topic: should ITS global rules have a parameter mechanism? See example at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Jun/0007.html and a proposed workflow how to achieve this at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Jun/0013.html 17:00 BCP 47 DEVELOPMENTS Related issues: - "Language versus locale" https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/10 Topic: what type of identifier to use for language and locale? Conclusion: use BCP 47 identifier for language, and a BCP 47 / UTR 35 based identifier for locale; see http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its2req-20120524/#Identification_of_Language_and_Locale - BCP 47 "t" extension has a similar purpose compared to mTranslate or hTranslate at http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its2req-20120524/#Process_Model: indicate or trigger a (certain kind of) translation process. There needs to be some guidance about the relation between the two approaches. ----------------------------------- WEDNESDAY 13 JUNE ----------------------------------- 9:15 PROJECT INFORMATION METADATA Related section http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its2req-20120524/#Project_Information Related issues: - "Process state" https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/6 Topic: define a shared set of process names. See the proposal at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Apr/0005.html Conclusion: none so far. - "Delete genre, purpose and register data category proposals". See description for "terminology metadata slot Tuesday 12:00. 11:00 TRANSLATION PROCESS METADATA Related section http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its2req-20120524/#Process_Model Related issues: - "Process trigger" https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/14 Topic: a separate data category for triggering processes. Closed by the "process model" definitions in the section http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its2req-20120524/#Process_Model - "Cache data category needed and how?" https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/13 Topic: metadata to identify content that should be cached for iterations of translations. See example at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012May/0155.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012May/att-0155/image002.jpg 13:00 PROVENANCE Related section http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its2req-20120524/#Provenance Related issues: - "Provenance and agents" https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/22 Topic: should verbose provenance records be offline or inline? 13:45 TRANSLATION METADATA Related sections http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its2req-20120524/#Translation http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its2req-20120524/#Internationalization Related issues: - "Create a (Sentence) Segmentation Markup System compatible with the proposed Unicode segmentation characters" https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/12 Topic: is there a need for a segmentation marker in ITS 2.0? Current state: on hold until the topic is discussed in the Unicode ULI TC, which is discussing the creation of a segmentation character. ==================================================================================================
Received on Thursday, 7 June 2012 12:54:44 UTC