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

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

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2012 07:00:46 +0200
Message-ID: <CAL58czrCg0eb2utm6kEchVstL=gSSRuJJdu2fPedjStOo4Ppow@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-mlw-workshop <public-mlw-workshop@w3.org>
Cc: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
Dear all,

below is a small update of the "sessions vs. issues" list. Also, FYI, the
working group participants have created a list of implementation proposals,
see

http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#Implementation_Proposals

Not all data categories that are mentioned in that list will eventually be
part of the ITS 2.0 standard. So far, there is only a small list of data
categories that has consensus, see

http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#Current_List_of_Data_Categories_with_Consensus_to_be_part_of_ITS_2.0


We very much look forward for you feedback in Dublin on how to stabilize
and potentially enlarge that list.

Best regards and see you soon,

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

- "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


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


 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.


==================================================================================================


-- 
Felix Sasaki
DFKI / W3C Fellow
Received on Sunday, 10 June 2012 05:01:15 UTC

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