W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org > June 2012

MLW workshop Dublin: Overview of issues to be discussed on 12-13 June (Tuesday-Wednesday)

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2012 14:54:16 +0200
Message-ID: <CAL58czrTAEVTr03mnH3cWZFRsQP_thOCZ+h0b_0iE81-F6ifww@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-mlw-workshop <public-mlw-workshop@w3.org>
Cc: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 9 June 2013 00:24:56 UTC