W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org > February 2013

Re: [Issue-63] New value for "Values for the Localization Quality Issue Type": "conformance" Re: [Minutes] MLW-LT call 2013-02-25 and action for implementers / review dry run

From: Dr. David Filip <David.Filip@ul.ie>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:25:06 +0000
Message-ID: <CANw5LKkf=gnz5M_otXjs504K47KG+mu5_4Q4Nyt2Phw_om98sQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>, Phil Ritchie <philr@vistatec.ie>, David Lewis <dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie>, public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
IMHO, Yves' point is very valid. Severity of "conformance" does not
make sense to me.
The scale would need to be turned upside down to make sense, which I
guess is not possible because of other values. The other values
uniformly name an issue not lack of it. Conformance in this context is
the name of the lack of the issue, not the issue itself.

"anomalous" may sound ugly, has nevertheless the required polarity and
meaning [the marked up text is anomalous looking at the gold corpus].
Still going with "non-conformance" seems sweet and easy..

Rgds
dF

Dr. David Filip
=======================
LRC | CNGL | LT-Web | CSIS
University of Limerick, Ireland
telephone: +353-6120-2781
cellphone: +353-86-0222-158
facsimile: +353-6120-2734
mailto: david.filip@ul.ie


On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 4:05 AM, Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com> wrote:
> I agree with Phil: it's sounds like a Harry Potter spell (and not a nice one).
>
> 'conformance' is fine, I asked about 'non-conformance' because that seemed more in-line with describing a problem.
> But either way is fine with me.
>
> -ys
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Phil Ritchie [mailto:philr@vistatec.ie]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 7:45 PM
> To: David Lewis
> Cc: Dr. David Filip; Felix Sasaki; public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
> Subject: Re: [Issue-63] New value for "Values for the Localization Quality Issue Type": "conformance" Re: [Minutes] MLW-LT call 2013-02-25 and action for implementers / review dry run
>
>
> Sorry, will respond to this later today but I don't like "anomalous".
>
> Phil
>
>
>
> On 26 Feb 2013, at 23:24, "David Lewis" <dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie> wrote:
>
>> Perhaps if we are inverting the meaning, then 'anomalous' might be a
> better name. Just a suggestion.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>> On 26 Feb 2013, at 13:39, "Dr. David Filip" <David.Filip@ul.ie> wrote:
>>
>> > All, I realize that Yves, had proposed inverting the value to
>> > non-conformance here
>> >
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Feb/0048.html
>
>> > which I think makes lot of sense.
>> > So we indeed need Phil's input here for making the call for consensus.
>> > @Phil, will you have this addressed in your proposal by tomorrow in
>> > order to move forward to the call for consensus?
>> > Thanks
>> > dF
>> >
>> > Dr. David Filip
>> > =======================
>> > LRC | CNGL | LT-Web | CSIS
>> > University of Limerick, Ireland
>> > telephone: +353-6120-2781
>> > cellphone: +353-86-0222-158
>> > facsimile: +353-6120-2734
>> > mailto: david.filip@ul.ie
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 6:59 PM, Dr. David Filip <David.Filip@ul.ie>
> wrote:
>> >> Felix, thanks for the minutes.
>> >> Felix, Phil, I expected a call for consensus to accept the new
>> >> conformance type as proposed by Phil, but the minutes say that this
>> >> did not move forward because Phil was not present.
>> >> Do you want Phil to make the call for consensus? I thought all was
>> >> clear on this one, and we literally only wanted to see if anyone
>> >> eventually comes with a new material objection.
>> >> I think it is time to close this one.. Thanks and please let me
>> >> know how you want to proceed re this issue.
>> >> dF
>> >>
>> >> Dr. David Filip
>> >> =======================
>> >> LRC | CNGL | LT-Web | CSIS
>> >> University of Limerick, Ireland
>> >> telephone: +353-6120-2781
>> >> cellphone: +353-86-0222-158
>> >> facsimile: +353-6120-2734
>> >> mailto: david.filip@ul.ie
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org> wrote:
>> >>> Hi all,
>> >>>
>> >>> minutes are at
>> >>> http://www.w3.org/2013/02/25-mlw-lt-minutes.html
>> >>> and below as text. Two important action items:
>> >>>
>> >>> - please fill in the doodle poll for Luxembourg, see
>> >>> http://www.doodle.com/2uizhdqmbmw6qwa9
>> >>> - HTML implementers: have a look at
>> >>> http://www.w3.org/2013/02/25-mlw-lt-minutes.html#item04
>> >>> and the discussion on defaults for HTML. The default
>> >>> implementation
> proposal
>> >>> at
>> >>>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Feb/0235.html
>
>> >>> may put some burden on implementers, see e.g.
>> >>>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Feb/0243.html
>
>> >>> before moving this forward we need to be sure that this is feasible.
> We will
>> >>> discuss the topic again on Wednesday.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Best,
>> >>>
>> >>> Felix
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> - Felix
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>   [1]W3C
>> >>>
>> >>>      [1] http://www.w3.org/
>> >>>
>> >>>                               - DRAFT -
>> >>>
>> >>>                               MLW-LT WG
>> >>>
>> >>> 25 Feb 2013
>> >>>
>> >>>   [2]Agenda
>> >>>
>> >>>      [2]
>> >>>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Feb/0241.html
>
>> >>>
>> >>>   See also: [3]IRC log
>> >>>
>> >>>      [3] http://www.w3.org/2013/02/25-mlw-lt-irc
>> >>>
>> >>> Attendees
>> >>>
>> >>>   Present
>> >>>          joerg, felix, kfritsche, Ankit, Des, Pedro, omstefanov,
>> >>>          Jirka, Yves, shaunm, Marcis, pnietoca, leroy, mdelolmo,
>> >>>          Giuseppe, Milan, tadej, davelewis
>> >>>
>> >>>   Regrets
>> >>>          christian, clemens, dom
>> >>>
>> >>>   Chair
>> >>>          felix
>> >>>
>> >>>   Scribe
>> >>>          shaunm
>> >>>
>> >>> Contents
>> >>>
>> >>>     * [4]Topics
>> >>>         1. [5]agenda
>> >>>         2. [6]High level usage scenario doc publication
>> >>>         3. [7]HTML ITS default behaviour
>> >>>         4. [8]https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt
>> >>>            /track/issues/68
>> >>>         5. [9]Conformance type
>> >>>         6. [10]XLIFF mapping
>> >>>         7. [11]Unicode normalization / NIF comments , ITS
>> >>>            Ontology
>> >>>         8. [12]AOB / Rome / Luxembourg prep
>> >>>     * [13]Summary of Action Items
>> >>>     __________________________________________________________
>> >>>
>> >>> agenda
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki>
>> >>>   [14]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>> >>>   lt/2013Feb/0241.html
>> >>>
>> >>>     [14]
>> >>>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Feb/0241.html
>
>> >>>
>> >>> High level usage scenario doc publication
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki>
>> >>>   [15]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Use
>> >>>   _cases_-_high_level_summary
>> >>>
>> >>>     [15]
>> >>>
> http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Use_cases_-_high_level_summary
>
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki> - having Christian editing the doc until next Monday
>> >>>   - vote for publication 6 March call - publication 8 March
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki> next monday = 4 march
>> >>>
>> >>>   fsasaki: publishing march 8. last date before the workshop
>> >>>   ... Please go through your use cases
>> >>>
>> >>> HTML ITS default behaviour
>> >>>
>> >>>   Yves_: there is discrepancy in behavior between different data
>> >>>   categories in HTML
>> >>>   ... when an author marks up a document because of different
>> >>>   behavior in different tools
>> >>>   ... we don't specify things like the <b> element should be
>> >>>   withinText
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki> ITS 1.0 global rules are at
>> >>>   [16]http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-i18n-bp/#relating-its-plus-xhtml
>> >>>
>> >>>     [16] http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-i18n-bp/#relating-its-plus-xhtml
>> >>>
>> >>>   Yves_: we could have a set of global rules for HTML that
>> >>>   implementors must use
>> >>>   ... if you don't implement global rules, this won't work.
>> >>>   instead have default attributes
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki> default implementation proposal at
>> >>>   [17]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>> >>>   lt/2013Feb/0235.html
>> >>>
>> >>>     [17]
>> >>>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Feb/0235.html
>
>> >>>
>> >>>   Yves_: implementation of such defaults is probably difficult
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki>
>> >>>   [18]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>> >>>   lt/2013Feb/0243.html
>> >>>
>> >>>     [18]
>> >>>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Feb/0243.html
>
>> >>>
>> >>>   Yves_: implementation is not a problem for okapi
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki>
>> >>>   [19]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>> >>>   lt/2013Feb/0205.html
>> >>>
>> >>>     [19]
>> >>>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Feb/0205.html
>
>> >>>
>> >>>   pnietoca: some MT systems hardcode translation of some
>> >>>   attributes
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki>
>> >>>   [20]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21085
>> >>>
>> >>>     [20] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21085
>> >>>
>> >>>   Yves_: currently html translate affects attribute and
>> >>>   its:translate does not
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki>
>> >>>   [21]http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#datacategories
>> >>>   -defaults-etc
>> >>>
>> >>>     [21]
>> >>>
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#datacategories-defaults-etc
>> >>>
>> >>>   kfritsche: in our implementation, we use non HTML specific
>> >>>   defaults from the ITS spec, sec. 8.1
>> >>>
>> >>>   <Marcis> Will there be a list of defaults somewhere specified?
>> >>>   We are currently adding Elements Within Text rules within HTML
>> >>>   documents...
>> >>>
>> >>>   pnietoca: we use global rules for translate, for instance.
>> >>>   ... if some people don't use it, you have to hardcode which
>> >>>   attributes to translate
>> >>>
>> >>>   kfritsche: is this the proposal to change the default values in
>> >>>   table 8.1?
>> >>>
>> >>>   Yves_: proposal is to have in the html specification
>> >>>   information on defaults
>> >>>
>> >>>   fsasaki: or we could provide a global rules file
>> >>>   ... I was proposing the defaults for people only doing its
>> >>>   locally
>> >>>
>> >>>   Yves_: there's a discrepancy between defaults and global rules
>> >>>   because of overriding
>> >>>   ... people who don't implement ITS globally just have to make
>> >>>   sure the behavior with defaults matches what it would be with
>> >>>   default values
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki> shaun: issue of not knowing what you are overriding
>> >>>   with local attributes - that is an issue with any format right?
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki> yves: yes
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki> shaun: who are the implementers who don't do global
>> >>>   rules?
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki>
>> >>>   [22]http://htmlpreview.github.com/?https://raw.github.com/finnl
>> >>>   e/ITS-2.0-Testsuite/master/its2.0/testSuiteDashboard.html
>> >>>
>> >>>     [22]
>> >>>
> http://htmlpreview.github.com/?https://raw.github.com/finnle/ITS-2.0-Testsuite/master/its2.0/testSuiteDashboard.html
>
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki> it seems everybody of the implementers currently on
>> >>>   the table, do global rules
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki> karl: new implementers might do local markup only -
>> >>>   we should be aware of that
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki> shaun: there is no implementation difficulty for me
>> >>>   either way
>> >>>
>> >>>   fsasaki: propose not to close this issue too fast
>> >>>   ... other people not on the call might have different opinions
>> >>>
>> >>>   Yves_: implementors could look at their implementations to see
>> >>>   how difficult defaults versus global rules is
>> >>>
>> >>>   fsasaki: give implementors time, come back to issue next
>> >>>   wednesday
>> >>>
>> >>>   <daveL> apologies for joining late
>> >>>
>> >>> [23]https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issu
>> >>> es/
>> >>> 68
>> >>>
>> >>>     [23]
>> >>> https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/6
>> >>> 8
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki> see draft + example files here
>> >>>   [24]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>> >>>   lt/2013Feb/0221.html
>> >>>
>> >>>     [24]
>> >>>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Feb/0221.html
>
>> >>>
>> >>>   tadej: no major contents changes. sent a draft to the mailing
>> >>>   list
>> >>>   ... we are dropping granularity levels, renaming to text
>> >>>   analysis, clarified some
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki> ACTION: christian to edit issue-68 proposal at
>> >>>   [25]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>> >>>   lt/2013Feb/0221.html into the its2 draft [recorded in
>> >>>   [26]http://www.w3.org/2013/02/25-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action01]
>> >>>
>> >>>     [25]
>> >>>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Feb/0221.html
>
>> >>>
>> >>>   <trackbot> Created ACTION-451 - Edit issue-68 proposal at
>> >>>   [27]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>> >>>   lt/2013Feb/0221.html into the its2 draft [on Christian Lieske -
>> >>>   due 2013-03-04].
>> >>>
>> >>>     [27]
>> >>>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Feb/0221.html
>
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki>
>> >>>   [28]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>> >>>   lt/2013Feb/att-0221/ta-examples-20130222.zip
>> >>>
>> >>>     [28]
>> >>>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Feb/att-0221/ta-examples-20130222.zip
>
>> >>>
>> >>>   omstefanov: all the file names in the test suite still refer to
>> >>>   disambiguation
>> >>>
>> >>>   tadej: should we rename all the files?
>> >>>
>> >>>   leroy: yes, and move to directories named for the category
>> >>>
>> >>> Conformance type
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki>
>> >>>   [29]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>> >>>   lt-comments/2013Feb/0048.html
>> >>>
>> >>>     [29]
>> >>>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Feb/0048.html
>
>> >>>
>> >>>   fsasaki: needs input from Phil. Phil not present today
>> >>>
>> >>> XLIFF mapping
>> >>>
>> >>>   daveL: xliff round-trip examples for rome help use work through
>> >>>   some issues
>> >>>   ... we need separate discussions on how best to present that as
>> >>>   best practices. don't spend time on that now. maybe in rome
>> >>>
>> >>>   Yves_: while discussing terminology, we realized when you tag
>> >>>   something in xliff, we don't have a way to mark it up with ITS
>> >>>   in the original document
>> >>>
>> >>>   <Marcis> A question: if we add mark-up to XLIFF, should we use
>> >>>   the mrk or its:span annotation?
>> >>>
>> >>>   daveL: in XLIFF we can add things after authoring time; don't
>> >>>   have local markup for these in ITS
>> >>>
>> >>>   <Yves_> to marcis: <mrk> (you can't have <its:span> in XLIFF)
>> >>>
>> >>>   Yves_: you can add ITS attributes to <mrk>. some are redundant
>> >>>   with XLIFF attributes
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki>
>> >>>   [30]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/XLI
>> >>>   FF_Mapping
>> >>>
>> >>>     [30]
>> >>> http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/XLIFF_Mapp
>> >>> ing
>> >>>
>> >>>   daveL: three use cases: mapping from source format to XLIFF,
>> >>>   mapping from XLIFF to target format, marking up XLIFF to be
>> >>>   consumed in XLIFF in another process
>> >>>   ... ideally have the same markup in all those cases, but might
>> >>>   not be possible
>> >>>
>> >>> Unicode normalization / NIF comments , ITS Ontology
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki>
>> >>>   [31]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>> >>>   lt-comments/2013Feb/0050.html
>> >>>
>> >>>     [31]
>> >>>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Feb/0050.html
>
>> >>>
>> >>>   fsasaki: don't require normalization in other technologies.
>> >>>   propose to close issue
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki>
>> >>>   [32]https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/i
>> >>>   ssues/119
>> >>>
>> >>>     [32]
>> >>> https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/1
>> >>> 19
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki>
>> >>>   [33]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/ITS
>> >>>   -RDF_mapping#Ontology_.28DRAFT.29
>> >>>
>> >>>     [33]
>> >>>
> http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/ITS-RDF_mapping#Ontology_.28DRAFT.29
>
>> >>>
>> >>>   daveL: expanded that out of example in NIF
>> >>>   ... took a Relax NG schema and went through data categories to
>> >>>   see which could be used in RDF and NIF
>> >>>   ... appreciate feedback
>> >>>   ... haven't figured out what we need to do with annotators ref.
>> >>>   works out in provenance setting, but maybe not NIF
>> >>>   ... problems where we've introduced idea that order has
>> >>>   temporal relationship
>> >>>
>> >>> AOB / Rome / Luxembourg prep
>> >>>
>> >>>   <fsasaki> [34]http://www.doodle.com/2uizhdqmbmw6qwa9
>> >>>
>> >>>     [34] http://www.doodle.com/2uizhdqmbmw6qwa9
>> >>>
>> >>>   fsasaki: have a call to prepare for rome meeting. please fill
>> >>>   in doodle poll
>> >>>
>> >>> Summary of Action Items
>> >>>
>> >>>   [NEW] ACTION: christian to edit issue-68 proposal at
>> >>>   [35]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>> >>>   lt/2013Feb/0221.html into the its2 draft [recorded in
>> >>>   [36]http://www.w3.org/2013/02/25-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action01]
>> >>>
>> >>>     [35]
>> >>>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Feb/0221.html
>
>> >>>
>> >>>   [End of minutes]
>> >>>     __________________________________________________________
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [37]scribe.perl version
>> >>>    1.137 ([38]CVS log)
>> >>>    $Date: 2013-02-25 17:36:45 $
>> >>>
>> >>>     [37]
> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
>> >>>     [38] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
>> >
>
>
> ************************************************************
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender immediately by e-mail.
>
> www.vistatec.com
> ************************************************************
>
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 27 February 2013 11:26:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 9 June 2013 00:25:08 UTC