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

Re: [Minutes] Prague f2f (draft) and Monday call

From: Naoto Nishio <naoto.nishio@ul.ie>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 21:48:15 +0000
Message-ID: <CALORs69hXWGWQF5Qcu0+HN2ZQn8VR1ETBgO7PgG2WJKeZzWJ8Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Cc: "public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org" <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
Hi Felix and all,

I am sorry that I am unable to attend the meeting this Monday due to my
personal reasons.

Kind regards,
Naoto

On 27 January 2013 19:58, Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org> wrote:

>  Hi all,
>
> minutes of the Prague f2f are at
>
> http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html
> http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-mlw-lt-minutes.html
>
> and below as text (search for "DAY1" and "DAY2" in this mail). During the
> Monday call we will go through the minutes / issues step by step, just to
> give people (esp. who have not been at the meeting) an opportunity to say
> whether they have additional comments on resolutions and open issues.
>
> I very likely can't be on the call, but please do the boring review of
> issues and use the call to bring your opinion to the table - better now
> than later :)
>
>
> Issues that need a follow up & discussion in the group are:
>
> - regex for allowed characters
> https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/67
> https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/105
> thanks a lot to Shaun for the regex review; now waiting for the "regex
> subset validation" regex.
>
> - NIF comments
> https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/72
>
> - disambiguation vs. terminology
> https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/67
>
> - ruby and directionality related comments, see issues mentioned at
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0144.html
>
> For others a lot of action items and edits need to be done, but before
> that has happened there is nothing to review for the group.
>
> The main aim of the call should be to find out
> - does the group think that we have missed issues?
> - do you agree with all resolutions achieved at the f2f?
> - do you have opinions on above open issues?
>
> Best,
>
> Felix
>
> =====
> DAY1
> =====
>
>    [1]W3C
>
>       [1] http://www.w3.org/
>
>                                - DRAFT -
>
>                                MLW-LT f2f
>
> 23 Jan 2013
>
>    [2]Agenda
>
>       [2] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/PragueJan2013f2f#Agenda
>
>    See also: [3]IRC log
>
>       [3] http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-irc
>
> Attendees
>
>    Present
>           Yves, Marcis, leroy, Ankit, Arle, dave, pnietoca,
>           mdelolmo, Karl, swalter, dF, truedesheim, felix, milan,
>           christan(remote 10-11), tadej, jirka, Pedro (remote 2-3
>           p.m.)
>
>    Regrets
>    Chair
>           felix
>
>    Scribe
>           fsasaki, daveL, Yves, Arle
>
> Contents
>
>      * [4]Topics
>          1. [5]roll call
>          2. [6]http://tinyurl.com/its20-comments-handling
>          3. [7]issue-67
>          4. [8]issue-69
>          5. [9]issue-70
>          6. [10]issue-71
>          7. [11]ISSUE-72 NIF comment
>          8. [12]issue-68
>          9. [13]issue-75
>         10. [14]issue-73
>         11. [15]issue-74
>         12. [16]issue-72
>         13. [17]issue-76
>         14. [18]issue-77
>         15. [19]issue-76 again
>         16. [20]issue-78
>         17. [21]issue-79
>         18. [22]issue-80
>         19. [23]issue-81
>         20. [24]issue-82
>         21. [25]case related comments
>         22. [26]ISSUE-84
>         23. [27]ISSUE-86
>         24. [28]meeting schedule
>         25. [29]Last workshop
>         26. [30]posters
>         27. [31]Issues
>         28. [32]issue-88
>         29. [33]issue-92
>         30. [34]Issue-93
>         31. [35]Issue-94
>         32. [36]issue-95
>         33. [37]issue-98
>         34. [38]issue-100
>         35. [39]issue-104
>         36. [40]issue-106 and issue-107
>         37. [41]issue-108 and issue-109
>         38. [42]locale filtering question
>         39. [43]test suite check
>         40. [44]RFC statements
>         41. [45]test suite
>         42. [46]requirements doc
>      * [47]Summary of Action Items
>      __________________________________________________________
>
> roll call
>
>    <fsasaki> checking attendance ...
>
> [48]http://tinyurl.com/its20-comments-handling
>
>      [48] http://tinyurl.com/its20-comments-handling
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [49]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Pra
>    gueJan2013f2f#Agenda
>
>      [49] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/PragueJan2013f2f#Agenda
>
>    <daveL> scribe daveL
>
> issue-67
>
>    <daveL> yves: had no feedback from shaun to date so we probably
>    can't advance here
>
>    <fsasaki> related:
>    [50]https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/i
>    ssues/105
>
>      [50] https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/105
>
>    <daveL> felix: comment could be addressed by dropping the ref
>    to XML schema
>
>    <daveL> yves: will respond on issue 105
>
> issue-69
>
>    <fsasaki> related:
>    [51]https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/i
>    ssues/69
>
>      [51] https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/69
>
>    <pnietoca> External rules may also have links to other external
>    rules (see example 20). The linking mechanism is recursive, and
>    subsequently after the processing the rules MUST be read
>    top-down (see example 21).
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [52]http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#link-external-
>    rules
>
>      [52] http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#link-external-rules
>
>    <daveL> pablo: had responded that this was clear in the
>    specification, but suggest a clarification
>
>    <pnietoca> the section is 5.4. (last paragraph)
>
>    <daveL> felix: confirms this is just a clarification
>
>    <pnietoca> change it
>
>    <fsasaki> "The linking mechanism is recursive" > "The linking
>    mechanism is recursive in a depth-first approach"
>
>    <daveL> tadej: perhaps explain this recursion as being 'depth
>    first' to be understandable more by computer scientists
>
> issue-70
>
>    <fsasaki> related:
>    [53]https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/i
>    ssues/70
>
>      [53] https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/70
>
>    <daveL> felix: ref to section 5.5
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [54]http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#selection-prec
>    edence
>
>      [54] http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#selection-precedence
>
>    <fsasaki> will add one entry between "global selections" and
>    "data category defaults" for inherited information, but not
>    specific to local markup
>
> issue-71
>
>    <fsasaki> related:
>    [55]https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/i
>    ssues/71
>
>      [55] https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/71
>
>    <fsasaki> annotatorsRef
>
>    <fsasaki> scribe: fsasaki
>
>    daveL: Yves said the problem is: you can have a lot of
>    annotatorRefs
>    ... issue is: how to deal with annotatorRefs with two instances
>    of local standoff markup
>    ... e.g. lq localization issues and provenacne records
>    ... so you can have multiple records of the same data category
>    applying to the same selection
>    ... you don't get the information whether the information comes
>    from different processes
>    ... Yves suggested whether we can put the information into the
>    same ...
>    ... my view was: for provenacne annotator ref is not that
>    important
>    ... so in the mail last night: could we exlude the lqi and
>    provenance from annotatorsRef
>    ... annotatorRefs is telling you what provided the provenacne
>    annotation
>
>    tadej: from provenance it is not needed, but for lqi?
>
>    dave: don't think so for lqissue.
>
>    yves: sounds weird: have annotatorsRef mandatory for some data
>    cats, possible for others, forbidden for two ...
>    ... currently it is required for mt-confidence and
>    disambiguation
>
>    <Marcis> ... and Terminology
>
>    yves: otehr solution: you could have it mandatory for these two
>    data categories, and don't have it for others
>    ... that would make things a lot simpler
>
>    dave: agree - not having two features interacting (standoff and
>    annotatorsRef) would be good
>
>    felix potential resolution - so keep it mandatory for
>    mt-confidence, disambiguation and term, and edit the list of
>    data category items in the spec
>
>    <scribe> scribe: daveL
>
>    <fsasaki> ACTION: dLewis6 to come back to chase and kevin about
>    discussion of issue-71
>    [56]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-irc#T08-34-49 recorded
>    in
>    [57]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action01]
>
>      [56] http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-irc#T08-34-49
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-388 - Come back to chase and kevin
>    about discussion of issue-71
>    [58]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-irc#T08-34-49 on David
>    Lewis - due 2013-01-30].
>
>      [58] http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-irc#T08-34-49
>
>    <fsasaki> ACTION: felix to change example
>    [59]http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#EX-its-tool-an
>    notation-1 if the agree on issue-71 , see discussion at
>    [60]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-irc#T08-34-49 recorded
>    in
>    [61]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action02]
>
>      [59] http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#EX-its-tool-annotation-1
>      [60] http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-irc#T08-34-49
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-389 - Change example
>    [62]http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#EX-its-tool-an
>    notation-1 if the agree on issue-71 , see discussion at
>    [63]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-irc#T08-34-49 on Felix
>    Sasaki - due 2013-01-30].
>
>      [62] http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#EX-its-tool-annotation-1
>      [63] http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-irc#T08-34-49
>
>    felix: example 28 needs to be revised also, will do this now
>
>    <fsasaki> scribe: fsasaki
>
>    daveL: using the example in the test file - should we have
>    usage of the data categories in the elements?
>
>    yves: yes
>
>    <daveL> dave: this example doesn't actually include the data
>    category attributes to which the annotatorRef refers
>
>    <daveL> felix: makes note that the test file and the example
>    should be revised to include this
>
>    yves: we don't have annotatorsRef for all disambiguation
>    examples
>
>    <daveL> yves: we don't have annotatorRef in all examples of
>    disambiguation
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: tadej to check disambiguation examples with
>    regards to presence of annotatorsRef [recorded in
>    [64]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action03]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-390 - Check disambiguation examples
>    with regards to presence of annotatorsRef [on Tadej Štajner -
>    due 2013-01-30].
>
> ISSUE-72 NIF comment
>
>    <daveL> felix: comment was which version of NIF do we refer to
>
>    [65]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>    lt-comments/2013Jan/0015.html
>
>      [65] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0015.html
>
>    <daveL> .. there are 1.0 and 2.0
>
>    <daveL> .. also there stabilit was raises
>
>    <daveL> ... and Christian also raised whether the mapping was
>    canonical
>
>    <daveL> dF: it may be a useful clarification for implementators
>
>    <daveL> felix: but its not clear what is meant by 'canonical
>    XML' in this case
>
>    <daveL> tadej: it implied there should be a canonical XML
>    serialisation
>
>    <daveL> felix: would such a requirement raise a bar for
>    implementors, this need to be dicussed further on the lists
>
>    <daveL> felix: now will attempt to dial in Christian
>
> issue-68
>
>    <scribe> scribe: fsasaki
>
>    marcis: there was a discussion on ITS term and disambiguation
>    ... christian brought it up, various comments from the WG
>    ... david suggested that we should not break ITS1.0, but felix
>    said it is not necessary to have it
>
>    <daveL> marcis: summarises discussion
>
>    <daveL>
>    [66]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>    lt-comments/2013Jan/0152.html
>
>      [66] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0152.html
>
>    daveF: don't break it if it works
>    ... that's the bottom line
>    ... we want to keep also independence of features
>
>    marcis: I could implement terminology independent of the rest
>    of disambiugation
>    ... the question is: if we agree to change something, it is
>    independent, so different question
>    ... david suggested to have a bp document that specifies how
>    things relate
>
>    daveF: there are seperate use cases for disambiguation and
>    terminology
>    ... things are backed by different use cases, also from the
>    implementers point of view
>
>    felix: we can also depcreate one of these
>
>    tadej: if we want to annotate the same fragment - which one to
>    choose?
>
>    marcis: that is the biggest problem
>    ... we cannot do both
>    ... there was a comment from yves, we should break larger
>    problems into smaller ones
>    ... so even if we have an "upper level" data category which we
>    could then use for both scenarios
>
>    tadej: we could use the same trip we did with annotators ref,
>    e.g. using multiple values in the same attribute
>    ... not sure if we would encourage people to do this
>    ... complex, but same level of complexity as ...
>    ... another solution tadej suggested was to have many
>    attributes , but that's the same as having everything in one
>    attribute
>    ... if we can come up with a closed set of types of annotation,
>    that's a solution
>    ... but that needs to be a closed set, since we are specifying
>    attributes
>    ... right now for disambiguation we agreed for three levels:
>    concept, entity, lexicon
>
>    marcis: there is no definition for each of these levels, e.g.
>    what is a lexical concept?
>    ... I saw that there is a terminology inconcistency
>    ... terminology is not used always in the same way in the
>    disambiguation description
>
>    daveL: the issue in using both of them for the same term - we
>    are not clear how to combine them?
>
>    tadej: it is not an issue at the moment
>    ... if you fold it in one data category, it becomes a problem
>
>    <chriLi> queue
>
>    daveF: a big system will have a terminology life cycle with
>    many manual people, but it is an automatic workflow
>
>    daveL: aim of disambiguation is that it would make the output
>    of automatic annotation available
>
>    christian: thanks to marcis for putting everything into a
>    condensed form
>    ... there are we with the discussion today: my understanding is
>    the following:
>    ... people think it is not a bad idea to try to come up with a
>    data category that can subsume what ITS2 terminology and ITS2
>    disambiguation try to cover
>    ... with respect to paying attention to ITS1: situation is that
>    there is no need to go for backwards compatibility
>    ... one way to achieve soft transition would be to deprecate
>    existing ITS term
>    ... one way to come up with the upper level data category: two
>    implementation suggestions were made: based on attrbiute values
>    and distinct values for annotation types
>    ... this is how I understand the current state of the
>    discussion
>    ... I'm wondering what the next step would be
>    ... to say: we realize that we want to really look into this
>    change
>    ... and want to do something to the current draft
>    ... if this wants to be driven it could be done via mail or a
>    seperate call
>    ... need to agree on the approach
>
>    <daveL> scrie: daveL
>
>    <daveL> scribe: daveL
>
>    felix: we have agreement that backward compatability isn't an
>    absolute barrier
>    ... but it is in my view desirable
>
>    Christian: fully agree
>
>    felix: another point is trying in general to reduce level of
>    substantive change
>    ... another point is experience of people who implement and
>    knwo users of its1.0 terminology
>    ... such as yves and OKAPI community
>
>    yves: not necessarily a big problem to change but would like to
>    keep backward compatibility in general
>
>    tadej: suggested changes would break backward compatibility
>
>    macis: potetnially we add complexity to terminology by
>    including link to external ontology or other lexical resource
>
>    df: agrees
>
>    felix: compromise is having an umbrella data category, and
>    allow term to stay the same
>
>    <fsasaki> arle: agree with marcis
>
>    marcis: have some questionns about the definition of
>    disambiguation, e.g. the meaning of what is a lexical concept
>
>    christian: support having an umbrella data category that would
>    not increase complexity of seaprate term and disambiguation use
>    case
>    ... also we will get better uptake if we can offer an easier
>    route to marking up the output of text analysis
>    ... rather than having to support the more complex issues in
>    disambiguation
>
>    tadej: the reason for defining granularities was the major
>    requirements of linguists, it was not sufficient to have this
>    all in the target external data structure
>    ... so even granularity definition was a compromise
>
>    arle: the term 'granularity' may also be an issue
>
>    tadej: was previously 'disambiguation type', but it was
>    difficult to find the right term
>
>    felxi: asks tadej, marcis, christan to come up with a proposal
>    that allows for both use cases and consider backward
>    comatibility for term?
>    ... but this would need to be done by the end of next week?
>
>    <Arle> Without putting too much thought into it, would
>    disambiguationClassType work? Would this always correspond to a
>    description of the kind of disambiguationClass intended?
>
>    christian: happy to let marcis and tadej to try and draft
>    something over these two days and then I can dial in again to
>    discuss it further
>
>    marcis: asks who was originator of disambig
>
>    tadej: originally it was a named entity recoginiser category,
>    but after discussion also became merged with diasambiguation
>    afteter discussion with linguasev and others
>
>    marcis: could we have a cascading model, since named entity can
>    be composite
>
>    <chriLi> Don't forget to bring the beer bottles to the room as
>    well :-)
>
>    daveL: note this overlaps with issue-109 on disambiguation in
>    indic languages
>
> issue-75
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [67]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>    lt-comments/2013Jan/0143.html
>
>      [67] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0143.html
>
>    felix: jorge as shepard has produced a summary of this topic
>
>    christian: my domain comment had three parts
>    ... one main point - was looking for a way for providing to
>    meta-data on a domain without pointing to resource, this has no
>    eyyt been resolved
>    ... another point was that domain meta-data is processor
>    specific
>    ... so in one world it is called x then the context in which x
>    is meaningful needs to be provided
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [68]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>    lt-comments/2013Jan/0136.html
>
>      [68] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0136.html
>
>    christian: now jorge has resolved point 2b, but the baove has
>    still also to be resolved
>
>    felix: felt adding this context meta was a new feature but
>    could be reolved with a note that this relates to a single
>    engine use case
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [69]https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/p
>    roducts/9
>
>      [69] https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/products/9
>
>    christian; broadly agrees such a note would satisfy him, since
>    in ITS the focus was on scenarios with a single engine
>    scenario. But this need to be made clear as an assumption in
>    ITS2.0
>
>    felix: have now started collacting items on tracker categories
>    as 'not addressed in ITS2.0'
>
> issue-73
>
>    felix: so if larger implementors, e.g. sap, adobe, ms, will but
>    resoruces into the multiengine scenario we could consider it,
>    other we should stick with making explicit the single engine
>    context
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [70]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>    lt-comments/2013Jan/0015.html
>
>      [70] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0015.html
>
>    felix: with NIF the stability is an issue and will refer back
>    to sebastian Helleman about the plan for this
>    ... need this information to react fully to this comment
>    ... other comment was how the mapping could benefit from
>    canonical definiition of mapping
>    ... so my comment is whether this would be of use to
>    implementors, since in the room there was a lot of
>    familiarisation with the use and benefits of canonicalisation
>
>    christian: asks do we have more than one implementation
>
>    felix: confirms we have one from sebastian and one from felix
>
>    christian: I brought this up to ensure that whenever NIF
>    processing is ensured, we end up with the same representation,
>    and this needs normalisation and canonicalisation
>    ... if not, then we may end up with versions that are
>    incompatible
>
>    felix: asks whether some comparison between document in NIF is
>    an likely use case. would the comparison not takeplace back in
>    the document itself
>
>    christian: I think you would need a unicode normalisation
>
>    felix: but this was related to regex in another data category
>
>    christian: if we are reocmmending normalisation anyway in this
>    other data category, could we not use this to solve the problem
>    here
>
> issue-74
>
>    <fsasaki> scribe: fsasaki
>
>    daveL: christian provided some bullet point comments
>    ... are you planning more re-writing
>    ... or should david and I take your comments in?
>
>    christian: if it would be ok with you
>    ... I could turn the bullet points that people could read
>    ... with respect with the general approach
>    ... I could do editing of the doc
>    ... by mid next week
>
>    [71]https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/a
>    ctions/377
>
>      [71] https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/actions/377
>
>    that would be action-377
>
>    davidF: that's clarificatory stutt, not very urgent
>    ... will wait for christian for a more readable version
>
>    felix: so we have discusesed all comments from christian
>
>    felix wil put thoughts on NIF in a mail
>
>    <scribe> scribe: Yves_
>
>    <scribe> Scribe: Yves_
>
> issue-72
>
>    <fsasaki> original comment here
>    [72]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>    lt-comments/2013Jan/0013.html
>
>      [72] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0013.html
>
>    <fsasaki> .. see "Section 8.12 (Provenance Data Category)"
>
>    daveL: Provenance issue is about timestamp
>    ... quite complex to implement
>    ... e.g when the information is capture, etc.
>    ... This is covered by the PROV standard
>    ... and we have a mechanism to point to that
>    ... so no need in ITS
>
>    <fsasaki> yves: so has the order of provenance a meaning?
>
>    daveL: so order SHOULD reflect the order things were added in
>    the document
>
>    original commentor got a reply and we are waiting for a
>    response. comment was rejected.
>
> issue-76
>
>    Arle: need to re-look at it
>
> issue-77
>
>    Jirka: proposal for a solution is in the issue's note.
>    ... question was about HTML and rules precedence
>
>    Jirka: no need to change anything
>    ... link is the same as link in global rules
>
>    <fsasaki> resolution proposal - see note from jirka Kosek, 22
>    Jan 2013, 22:58:35 at
>    [73]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/is
>    sues/77
>
>      [73] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/77
>
>    Marcis: my comment was that it was difficult to understand how
>    things work
>    ... because it's defined in multiple places
>
>    felix: in section 6.4 there are some explanation
>    ... we would add Jirka's clarification there
>    ... this would define the inheritance behavior
>
>    jirka: maybe issue is that global rules need to be read in
>    document order
>
>    <fsasaki> "Global selections in documents (using mechanism of
>    external global rules or inline global rules)" > "Global
>    selections in documents (using mechanism of external global
>    rules or inline global rules), to be processed in document
>    order"
>
>    <fsasaki> "Global selections in documents (using mechanism of
>    external global rules or inline global rules)" > "Global
>    selections in documents (using mechanism of external global
>    rules or inline global rules), to be processed in document
>    order, see section 5.2.1 for details "
>
>    Felix: could point to 5.2.1 in the HTML section
>    ... let's close this issue. See the note in the issue page.
>
>    <fsasaki> ACTION: jirka to make edit for issue-77 [recorded in
>    [74]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action04]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-391 - Make edit for issue-77 [on
>    Jirka Kosek - due 2013-01-30].
>
> issue-76 again
>
>    Arle: an implementer was looking at issue's type
>    ... and saw inconsistency
>
>    <fsasaki> original comment at
>    [75]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>    lt-comments/2013Jan/0026.html
>
>      [75] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0026.html
>
>    Arle: solution would be to change the definition
>    ... add "or text is translated inconsistently"
>    ... and a second example.
>
>    <Arle> Proposed change: The text is inconsistent within itself
>    or text is translated inconsistently (NB: not for use with
>    terminology inconsistency).
>
>    <Arle> Add second example: The translated text uses different
>    wording for a single regulatory notice in the source that
>    occurs multiple times in a series of manuals.
>
>    <fsasaki> change in this sec
>    [76]http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#lqissue-typeva
>    lues
>
>      [76] http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#lqissue-typevalues
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: arle to make the edit for issue 76 [recorded
>    in
>    [77]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action05]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-392 - Make the edit for issue 76 [on
>    Arle Lommel - due 2013-01-30].
>
> issue-78
>
>    Felix: rel-type was registered, no more action is needed.
>
>    Felix: wrote a reply to that comment
>
> issue-79
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [78]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>    lt-comments/2013Jan/0145.html
>
>      [78] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0145.html
>
>    Felix: added text indicating namespace prefix can be difference
>    than its if it exists already
>
>    Jirka: this just duplicate information. not good
>    ... the initial text should already address the comment
>
>    <fsasaki> "The namespace URI that MUST be used by
>    implementations of this specification is:" > "The namespace URI
>    that MUST be used by XML-based implementations of this
>    specification is:"
>
>    Jirka: add only "XML-based" to implementation
>
>    <fsasaki> ACTION: felix to go back to richard about new
>    resolution for issue-79 [recorded in
>    [79]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action06]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-393 - Go back to richard about new
>    resolution for issue-79 [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30].
>
> issue-80
>
>    Felix: we can just add links to example
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: felix to add links to examples for issue 80
>    [recorded in
>    [80]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action07]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-394 - Add links to examples for issue
>    80 [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30].
>
> issue-81
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [81]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>    lt-comments/2013Jan/0071.html
>
>      [81] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0071.html
>
>    felix: related to issue-89
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [82]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>    lt-comments/2013Jan/0066.html
>
>      [82] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0066.html
>
>    Felix: issue is not clear how HTML maps to ITS
>    ... some HTML construct are explicitely mapped, other are not
>    ... like terminology (dfn, dt, etc.)
>    ... should an implementer of HTML/ITS process those constructs
>    as term? or not?
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [83]http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-xml-i18n-bp-20080213/
>
>      [83] http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-xml-i18n-bp-20080213/
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [84]http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-xml-i18n-bp-20080213/#relati
>    ng-its-plus-xhtml
>
>      [84] http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-xml-i18n-bp-20080213/#relating-its-plus-xhtml
>
>    Felix: Possible solution is a mapping defined in bets practice
>    ... like we did in ITS 1.0
>    ... we did this only as a best practice
>    ... e.g. we don't talk about dfn in ITS 1.0
>    ... for issue 81 we would not define normative relation to term
>    ... but provide mapping in best practices document
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [85]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>    lt-comments/2013Jan/0111.html
>
>      [85] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0111.html
>
>    Felix: related issue is issue-97
>    ... some HTML features are used but not declared as such, like
>    'translate'
>    ... we should have something like "the ITS processor
>    implementing Tranlsate MUST implement HTML5 translate
>    attribute"
>
>    See also note in issue-97
>
>    Yves: this would resolve the issue
>
>    <fsasaki> "the ITS processor implementing Tranlsate MUST
>    implement HTML5 translate attribute" > "the ITS processor
>    implementing Translate MUST implement HTML5 translate attribute
>    in the same was as the ITS translate attribute for XML content"
>
>    dF: we have a problem
>    ... we don't have an its-translate equivalent
>
>    Yves: we map to a functionality not an attribute
>    ... like id or lang
>
>    dF: we want to say HTML5 translate is the Translate local
>    markup
>
>    Yves: maybe we can re-use same text as for lang and id
>
>    <kfritsche> "The recommended way to specify language
>    identification is to use xml:lang in XML, and lang in HTML."
>
>    Felix: for language we would need to say that lang has
>    precedence
>
>    <fsasaki> "If the attribute xml:id is present or id in HTML for
>    the selected node, the value of the xml:id attribute or id in
>    HTML MUST take precedence over the idValue value."
>
>    <fsasaki> for lang info to be adapted to mention precedence of
>    xml:lang and lang other langRule
>
>    Felix: we don't have an issue for lang
>    ... we would also need test cases
>    ... if there are xml;lang and lang present, lang MUST take
>    precedence
>    ... we need a test case for it
>    ... need to test xml:lang lang in a XHTML file
>
>    [86]http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#C_7
>
>      [86] http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#C_7
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: felix to check what of lang and xml;lang takes
>    precedence [recorded in
>    [87]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action08]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-395 - Check what of lang and xml;lang
>    takes precedence [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30].
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: ankit to create example for xml;lang / lang
>    [recorded in
>    [88]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action09]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-396 - Create example for xml;lang /
>    lang [on Ankit Srivastava - due 2013-01-30].
>
>    Yves: xml;lang seems to take precedence according:
>    [89]http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#C_7
>
>      [89] http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#C_7
>
>    <swalter> In HTML 5 the native HTML 5 translate attribute MUST
>    be used to express the Translate data category.
>
>    <fsasaki> issue-97 proposal
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: yves to enter the new text for 97 (above)
>    [recorded in
>    [90]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action10]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-397 - Enter the new text for 97
>    (above) [on Yves Savourel - due 2013-01-30].
>
>    dF: I would table the dfn/dt issue before Term/Disambiguation
>    is resolved
>
>    Felix: think there are 2 type of content: clear relation (like
>    id translate) and un-clear (dfn)
>
>    Marcis: dfn is very narrow
>    ... employed only in very restricted definition
>    ... dfn is like a sub-type of ITS term
>
>    Tadej: dt is only in a list
>
>    karlF: adding a default rule would be better
>    ... simpler
>
>    Marcis: but only in a BP document
>
>    Felix: yes
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [91]http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-xml-i18n-bp-20080213/#relati
>    ng-its-plus-xhtml
>
>      [91] http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-xml-i18n-bp-20080213/#relating-its-plus-xhtml
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: Felix to answer Richard to indicate we'll
>    address this with a rule file in BP [recorded in
>    [92]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action11]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-398 - Answer Richard to indicate
>    we'll address this with a rule file in BP [on Felix Sasaki -
>    due 2013-01-30].
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: Felix to draft non-normative section
>    clarifying relations to HTML for issue 89 [recorded in
>    [93]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action12]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-399 - Draft non-normative section
>    clarifying relations to HTML for issue 89 [on Felix Sasaki -
>    due 2013-01-30].
>
>    action felix to edit the specification for Translate (MUST
>    missing, etc.)
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-400 - Edit the specification for
>    Language (MUST missing, etc.) [on Felix Sasaki - due
>    2013-01-30].
>
> issue-82
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [94]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>    lt-comments/2013Jan/0067.html
>
>      [94] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0067.html
>
>    Felix: if values are ok, no need to have a mapping
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [95]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-international/2013J
>    anMar/0048.html
>
>      [95] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-international/2013JanMar/0048.html
>
>    felix: something without mapping just pass through
>
>    <fsasaki> answer to the comment: "STEP 3-1-2-5-2. Else (if no
>    mapping is found): Add the string (in its original cases) to
>    the result string."
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: daveL to reply to Richard [recorded in
>    [96]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action13]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-401 - Reply to Richard [on David
>    Lewis - due 2013-01-30].
>
> case related comments
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [97]https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/i
>    ssues/102
>
>      [97] https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/102
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [98]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>    lt-comments/2013Jan/0116.html
>
>      [98] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0116.html
>
>    Pablo: at first we used case-sensitive
>    ... then we moved to insensitive
>    ... we could compare directly
>    ... but if document is encoded differently we may have entities
>    ... and the string is different
>
>    <fsasaki> scribe: fsasaki
>
>    yves: by entity you mean "person"?
>
>    pablo: yes
>
>    <pnietoca> <meta name="description" content="Econom&iacute;a"/>
>
>    <pnietoca> ... domainMapping="Economía (ECON), Leyes (Law)"/>
>
>    yves: but that gets resolved then you parse the documnt
>
>    pablo: see example above
>
>    yves: then you read the document the entity wil be converted
>    into í
>    ... if we just do case-sensitive we have a problem
>    ... the reason why we want to have insensitive: to avoid
>    duplicates
>    ... because we know people don't regard casing for keywords
>    anyway
>    ... so in one case we say: case matters, in others we say they
>    don't matter
>    ... so one solution is: case always matters
>    ... but what is the solution for HTML?
>
>    davidF: wouldn't be worried that you preserve case
>    ... only if you fail to map
>
>    yves: only when you compare during the mapping you are
>    uncertain
>    ... problem is: many documents have keywords typed differently
>    ... could also have a keyword saying "mapping or not"
>
>    felix: would that delay the problem
>    ...
>
>    resolution: agree with first question in
>    [99]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>    lt-comments/2013Jan/0116.html
>    ... 2nd question becomes unnecessary
>
>      [99] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0116.html
>
>    <scribe> scribe: Yves_
>
>    action yves to fix text and algo for domain case mapping
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-402 - Fix text and algo for domain
>    case mapping [on Yves Savourel - due 2013-01-30].
>
>    scribe Yves_
>
> ISSUE-84
>
>    dF: dave split indic language issues into 3 topics
>    ... first one is covered in issue-84
>
>    <fsasaki> reply from dave on issue-84 at
>    [100]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb
>    -lt-comments/2013Jan/0149.html
>
>     [100] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0149.html
>
>    dF: answer is: yes transliterating is different but we didn't
>    have enough use cases for a requirement
>    ... that made it as a final data category
>
>    felix: so we are waiting for a reply now
>
> ISSUE-86
>
>    felix: implementation committement
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [101]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb
>    -lt-comments/2013Jan/0144.html
>
>     [101] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0144.html
>
>    for several issues
>
>    scribe: for Ruby and Directionality
>    ... basically we don't have experts and no volunteer to
>    implement
>    ... Ruby may be ported for XLIFF
>    ... still not sure what is the aim: dropping ruby or not?
>    ... also not sure when we can expect stability
>    ... but we want to be feature complete very soon
>    ... questions to the i18n are out, waiting for feedback
>
>    <fsasaki> yves: directionality is not really used in XLIFF
>
>    <fsasaki> .. implementers use control characters
>
>    <fsasaki> .. we tried really hard in XLIFF2
>
>    <fsasaki> .. we have a module for directionality in XLIFF2
>
>    <fsasaki> .. but the implementers would insert rather control
>    characters than markup
>
>    dF: when we discussed directionality in Lyon, someone described
>    how to do dir with inline markup
>
>    felix: .. for Ruby, I don't think anyone implemented the
>    pointer for example
>
>    Arle: need to speak to Asian developers
>    ... group is not representative
>    ... for these issues
>
>    Felix: for Japanese there is a detailed document on layout
>    ... and requirements in XML and HTML are pushed by this doc and
>    issues not addressed in ITS2ument
>    ... Our question is how can we deal with it?
>
>    Arle: maybe it can be defined later in a different namespace
>
>    Felix: maybe, but baiscally it's the same for ITS 2.
>    ... lunh time now
>
>    <Arle> s/lunh/lunch
>
>    <Arle> s/lunh/lunch/
>
>    <Arle> Scribe: Arle
>
> meeting schedule
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [102]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Ev
>    entSchedule
>
>     [102] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/EventSchedule
>
>    Felix: I thought of discussing the next meetings, but Pedro
>    isn't here.
>    ... See the wiki page. You will see that thanks to Tadej that
>    we have a face-to-face in Bled in May.
>    ... I just got an email from Pedro with some offers to host the
>    face-to-face in Madrid, but all are beyond budget (€5000),
>    because he would have to rent meeting space.
>    ... We might need to think of an alternative to Madrid. One
>    alternative is LocWorld in June in London.
>    ... We could ask Microsoft if there is a London office we could
>    use.
>
>    <fsasaki> s/Microsoft/xyz/
>
>    LocWorld is 12–14 June
>
>    David: 10 June is XLIFF; 11–12 June (?) is FEISGILTT
>
>    Felix: We will need technical discussions in June.
>
>    Yves: Whole week is booked for some people with the different
>    events.
>
>    Felix: Week of 17th?
>    ... Please check your calendars to see if that might work.
>    ... 17–18 June is the suggestion.
>
>    Location: TBD in a cheap place.
>
>    Felix: Berlin would be free.
>
>    s/Location:/.. Location/
>
>    Dave: Dublin is an option.
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: Felix is to check availability of Berlin on
>    17–18 June. [recorded in
>    [103]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action14]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-403 - Is to check availability of
>    Berlin on 17–18 June. [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30].
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: daveL to check availability in Dublin for
>    face-to-face meeting on 17–18 June. [recorded in
>    [104]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action15]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-404 - Check availability in Dublin
>    for face-to-face meeting on 17–18 June. [on David Lewis - due
>    2013-01-30].
>
>    Pedro: I am looking at various possibilities in Madrid still.
>
>    Felix: Would it be OK for you if we look at other cities to
>    save costs?
>
>    Pedro: That is fine for me. Leave Madrid as an alternative.
>    ... My latest option in Madrid comes to 3–3.5K€, if we have
>    everyone stay at the same hotel.
>
>    Felix: We need to fix these dates as soon as possible because
>    of Localization World so that travel can be arranged by
>    everyone as appropriate.
>    ... Dave and I will try to decide so people can make
>    arrangements.
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [105]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Ev
>    entSchedule
>
>     [105] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/EventSchedule
>
>    Felix: We are also considering another face-to-face in
>    September, around LRC conference.
>    ... In Limerick.
>    ... Dates would be 16–17 September (pending confirmation).
>    ... Would 23–24 September be also good
>
>    <fsasaki> will come back to september meeting tomorrow
>
>    s/also good/also good?/
>
>    <fsasaki> 23-24 would be difficult for cocomore
>
> Last workshop
>
>    Felix: Project ends in December. DoW shows we spend most
>    efforts until September, so if the workshop is in December,
>    mass may be difficult. Do we have a regular workshop, or some
>    other kind of event?
>    ... Any ideas of other options for final event?
>    ... We can't drop it due to work package, which describes it as
>    biggest workshop.
>
>    Pedro: What about colocation of the final workshop with another
>    event?
>    ... David: What about tcworld?
>
>    s/.. David:/David../
>
>    scribe: It is a big one. Might be good to connect there.
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: Felix to follow up with Christian on tekom as
>    an option. [recorded in
>    [106]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action16]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-405 - Follow up with Christian on
>    tekom as an option. [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30].
>
>    Arle: Consider that colocating with a commercial event will
>    likely have higher costs.
>
>    Felix: We can do another MLW workshop, or look at other
>    options.
>
>    Yves: That is a lot of work.
>
>    Felix: Yes, and after September, we can't ask people for a lot
>    of work.
>    ... Also, September/October is probably too early for the next
>    workshop after the one in March.
>    ... What if we don't make a conference or go to one? Instead we
>    have an event (possibly closed) to do demos to customers?
>
>    <Pedro> Pedro: Tekom, Wiesbaden 06Nov-08Nov2013
>
>    Felix: we can consider still in January. Let me and Dave know
>    of any options that come to mind.
>
>    Dave: I can already confirm space would be available in Dublin
>    in June.
>
> posters
>
>    Felix: Our reviewers will most likely not be in Rome. So we
>    need to make a presentation in Luxembourg. Posters would help
>    show completion.
>
>    Pedro: What size should they be?
>
>    Felix: A0.
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: Arle to resize templates for posters from A1
>    to A0. [recorded in
>    [107]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action17]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-406 - Resize templates for posters
>    from A1 to A0. [on Arle Lommel - due 2013-01-30].
>
> Issues
>
>    <daveL> scribe daveL
>
> issue-88
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [108]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb
>    -lt-comments/2013Jan/0070.html
>
>     [108] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0070.html
>
>    <daveL> felix: this is just editorial in the directionality
>    section
>
>    <scribe> Scribe: Arle
>
>    <fsasaki> s/topic: Issues//
>
>    David: I don't know the difference between the HTML elements
>    here.
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: Felix to check for clarification on Issue-88
>    [recorded in
>    [109]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action18]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-407 - Check for clarification on
>    Issue-88 [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30].
>
> issue-92
>
>    <fsasaki> original mail at
>    [110]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb
>    -lt-comments/2013Jan/0076.html
>
>     [110] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0076.html
>
>    Yves: This is a note from Richard asking why information is in
>    a note, which is not normative.
>    ... Can a note be normative? I believe they can be if they are
>    in a normative section. I believe we have MUSTS in notes.
>
>    Felix: I think that is a mistake.
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: Felix to ensure that there is no MUST in any
>    notes. [recorded in
>    [111]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action19]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-408 - Ensure that there is no MUST in
>    any notes. [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30].
>
>    Yves: idValue global has one.
>
>    <fsasaki> relation to issue-103 - clarify the algorithm
>
>    Yves: One explanation + bullet explaining that empty = no
>    locale and * = all locales. Then we can eliminate the note.
>
>    Felix: Solution is to have three bullets explaining the cases,
>    and delete note. Resolves issue-92 and issue-103.
>    ... Yves, do you use extended filtering?
>
>    Yves: Yes. We do. We need to check with Shaun, but I believe
>    this is the algorithm for extended filtering.
>
>    Felix: We need to express the approach described in BCP47 and
>    that it will work for everyone implementing this. Tilde should
>    check.
>    ... Ankit and Marcis, should we return to this, or can we
>    assume that if we don't hear otherwise, it’s OK?
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: Yves to follow up with Richard and Norbert on
>    issue-92 and issue-103. [recorded in
>    [112]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action20]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-409 - Follow up with Richard and
>    Norbert on issue-92 and issue-103. [on Yves Savourel - due
>    2013-01-30].
>
> Issue-93
>
>    Jirka: Proposed resolution is to use what was proposed by
>    original commenter.
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: Jirka to write to Henry on issue-93 and make
>    the change in the text. [recorded in
>    [113]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action21]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-410 - Write to Henry on issue-93 and
>    make the change in the text. [on Jirka Kosek - due 2013-01-30].
>
> Issue-94
>
>    Felix: I think Jirka has a proposed resolution.
>
>    Jirka: I've sent replies to Henry, but not heard back. I think
>    we should resolve this issue in a different way. See link at
>    end of issue.
>    ... HTML has different rules for processing white space and
>    decimal numbers. There is different precision between XML and
>    HTML.
>    ... The easiest resolution is to use the double data type in
>    XML for ITS. It will align XLM and HTML. Double is implemented
>    in almost all programming languages. So we move all data types
>    to double and deal with the differences in leading and trailing
>    whitespace between the two.
>
>    Felix: This impacts localization quality, MT confidence, and
>    localization quality rating.
>    ... Is this OK for all implementers?
>
>    Jirka: Only difference is that double has lower precision than
>    decimal. And you can use exponential notation.
>
>    Felix: Also disambigConfidence and term confidence.
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: Jirka to change localization quality,
>    localization rating, mt confidence, term confidence, and
>    disambig confidence to use double rather than decimal and
>    respond to Henry (Issue-94) [recorded in
>    [114]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action22]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-411 - Change localization quality,
>    localization rating, mt confidence, term confidence, and
>    disambig confidence to use double rather than decimal and
>    respond to Henry (Issue-94) [on Jirka Kosek - due 2013-01-30].
>
> issue-95
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [115]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb
>    -lt-comments/2013Jan/0093.html
>
>     [115] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0093.html
>
>    Felix: We should reject this. The proposal itself said that
>    translatable is different than localizable (e.g., in formatting
>    numbers and images).
>    ... Discussion was between Norbert, Felix, Des, and Phil.
>    ... I think addressing this would take too much time at this
>    point.
>
>    <fsasaki> another point for Dave here
>    [116]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb
>    -lt-comments/2013Jan/0147.html
>
>     [116] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0147.html
>
>    Dave: It really is out of scope for ITS.
>    ... Translators will deal with this on their own anyway.
>
>    Felix: Norbert asked if we could use ITS for localizing CLDR? I
>    don't see that as a real use case.
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: Felix to let Norbert know that action-95 is
>    out of scope. [recorded in
>    [117]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action23]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-412 - Let Norbert know that action-95
>    is out of scope. [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30].
>
> issue-98
>
>    <fsasaki> s/issue-98/issue-98 and issue-99
>
>    Milan: related to issue-99. I found that there is no way to do
>    this. It is mentioned only for global approach to selectors and
>    what is allowed. Chapter 1.1 should state that the local
>    approach can be applied only to the content of the current
>    element and any inherited nodes, per 8.1
>    ... For issue-99, when using selectors in ITS, how do you
>    select attributes? Information is there, but the definition of
>    node differs between XML and HTML, leading to confusion. I see
>    Yves’ suggestion to remove CSS as a selector type since they
>    can point only to elements, but I would keep it and add a note
>    that we can only point to elements, not attributes.
>
>    David: I think it makes sense to keep CSS.
>
>    Felix: We don't have any implementers using selectors.
>
>    Yves: Shaun is, as a prototype.
>
>    Felix: I never got it to work.
>
>    Yves: Norbert says for HTML people selectors may be important.
>    ... But with no implementations, it won't happen. It's marked
>    as endangered.
>
>    Felix: We can drop "at risk" bits.
>    ... I agree with Milan's solution, but we might drop them
>    anyway.
>
>    Jirka: suggested a path to get implementation.
>
>    Felix: It would be nice. Right now we have two paths, doing
>    testing only for XPath, but not for CSS.
>
>    Jirka: Do we need tests, since they just select nodes?
>
>    Felix: Maybe the test suite or elsewhere, would we have
>    examples making use of CSS.
>    ... If we don't have testing, W3C management may not like us
>    saying "you can do it on your own but we haven't done it."
>
>    Jirka: We need at least one selection mechanism. Testing is to
>    verify interoperability.
>
>    Felix: We need to have at least one example for standardization
>    and users about how to use it. We have no CSS examples.
>
>    Jirka: Let's have some examples, parallel to XPath examples.
>
>    Felix: Can you link to libraries to convert between CSS and
>    XPath selectors?
>    ... Are there non-browser conversions?
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: Jirka to find data on CSS and XPath selectors
>    conversion libraries and keep CSS selectors in the spec.
>    [recorded in
>    [118]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action24]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-413 - Find data on CSS and XPath
>    selectors conversion libraries and keep CSS selectors in the
>    spec. [on Jirka Kosek - due 2013-01-30].
>
> issue-100
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [119]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb
>    -lt-comments/2013Jan/0126.html
>
>     [119] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0126.html
>
>    Felix: Yves proposed a resolution.
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: Felix to make edit for issue-100 and get back
>    to Norbert. [recorded in
>    [120]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action25]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-414 - Make edit for issue-100 and get
>    back to Norbert. [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30].
>
> issue-104
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: Felix to update unicode reference for
>    issue-104 [recorded in
>    [121]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action26]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-415 - Update unicode reference for
>    issue-104 [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30].
>
> issue-106 and issue-107
>
>    <fsasaki> 106 see
>    [122]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb
>    -lt-comments/2013Jan/0121.html
>
>     [122] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0121.html
>
>    <fsasaki> s/106/107/
>
>    Karl: Norbert asked some questions and we weren't sure how to
>    resolve them. It isn't up to the spec. The implementation must
>    support UTF-8, but that is up to the implementer. It is best
>    practice, especially for storage size. But we don't think it
>    has to be mandatory for all implementations.
>
>    <fsasaki> 106 see
>    [123]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb
>    -lt-comments/2013Jan/0120.html
>
>     [123] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0120.html
>
>    Karl: Other question was how to handle encoding when the
>    implementation doesn't support it. Again, this is not up to the
>    spec. We can define best practice, but it doesn't need to be
>    stated in the spec.
>
>    Stephan: Perhaps we have an explanation about what storage size
>    is used for. The question is about when it is used to markup
>    text in the source language. It is informational, but not up to
>    the spec to tell us what to do if a tool doesn't support an
>    encoding or if user text cannot be represented in a given
>    encoding.
>
>    Karl: We should add a sentence to storage size, per the note on
>    the issue-107.
>
>    Felix: on issue-106 and issue-107 we do nothing, just let
>    Norbert know the rationale.
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: Karl to propose solution to Norbert and then
>    Felix can add to spec. [recorded in
>    [124]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action27]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-416 - Propose solution to Norbert and
>    then Felix can add to spec. [on Karl Fritsche - due
>    2013-01-30].
>
>    Felix: When we go back to Norbert, talk about what we did in
>    the group to show there is consensus.
>
> issue-108 and issue-109
>
>    Felix: Both relate to Indic requirements.
>
>    Dave: They make a point that there is dependency on context
>    (e.g., part of speech) that influences how you translate
>    things. They want PoS in localizationNote and provided an annex
>    of possible annotations.
>    ... Adding a data type specifically for this would be a big
>    change. You see companies when they want to add their own
>    metadata use localizationNote with name:value pairs. It could
>    be best practice outside the spec.
>
>    <daveL>
>    [125]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb
>    -lt-comments/2013Jan/0154.html
>
>     [125] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0154.html
>
>    <fsasaki> reply from Dave on locNote its2 req , see above mail
>
>    Dave: I pointed them to other relevant resources, like NIF.
>
>    Arle: This would be too complex for us to solve this problem.
>    Anything that works for Europe may fall apart elsewhere.
>    ... I don't think we could solve this in a reasonable time
>    frame without too much controversy.
>
>    Tadej: they have PoS taggers in MT already, but it is
>    specialized. This would be scope creep.
>
>    Marcis: Once you add PoS, you have to add syntax, etc.…
>
>    Dave: Do humans need PoS tagging? I don't know.
>
>    Marcis: Wouldn't this be duplicating existing work in text
>    analysis.
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: DaveL to go back to Somnath on issue-108 to
>    explain why we won't address it. [recorded in
>    [126]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action28]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-417 - Go back to Somnath on issue-108
>    to explain why we won't address it. [on David Lewis - due
>    2013-01-30].
>
>    Dave: issue-109 falls out of my expertise. It deals with nested
>    output from NER.
>
>    Tadej: I didn't quite follow the requirements. It seems they
>    want to show that parts of entities may be entities. I don't
>    know if they need this or are showing what they might do with
>    this.
>    ... Regardless of this, the comment that hierarchy is needed.
>
>    Dave: We can't do this.
>
>    Tadej: Overriding makes that the case, but if we allowed
>    multiple values, we could.
>
>    Dave: But you need to show that the different parts are bound
>    together.
>
>    Tadej: If you allow multiple values (e.g., something can belong
>    to two entities), then the scope can be ambiguous.
>
>    Marcis: But there should be no ambiguous overlaps in a
>    hierarchy.
>
>    Stephan: When would you actually use the knowledge that you
>    have nested named entities?
>
>    Tadej: Can we make the restriction that entities are
>    contiguous?
>
>    Dave: That would be reasonable.
>    ... The solution isn't straight-foward. This would be a new
>    feature. I think we should respond in that way.
>
>    s/Dave: The solution/.. The solution/
>
>    Discussion about whether hierarchy is needed and produced.
>
>    Dave: You could also point to a NIF record with that structure
>    in it.
>
>    Tadej: If several disambiguationRefs address something, we
>    can't tell which one produced what.
>    ... If a single node can have multiple values it makes tracking
>    hard. We use stand-off for this.
>    ... This multiple granularity might break things.
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: Dave to respond to Somnath on issue-109 to
>    explain we are looking at it to make recommendations. [recorded
>    in
>    [127]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action29]
>
>    <trackbot> Error finding 'Dave'. You can review and register
>    nicknames at
>    <[128]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/
>    users>.
>
>     [128] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/users%3E.
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: DaveL to respond to Somnath on issue-109 to
>    explain we are looking at it to make recommendations. [recorded
>    in
>    [129]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action30]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-418 - Respond to Somnath on issue-109
>    to explain we are looking at it to make recommendations. [on
>    David Lewis - due 2013-01-30].
>
> locale filtering question
>
>    <fsasaki> marcis: in content is "de"
>
>    <fsasaki> .. in the localeFilter it would be de-de
>
>    <fsasaki> felix: not matched
>
> test suite check
>
>    Felix: We don't have a lot of coverage (38%) and most of that
>    is thanks to Yves and Fredryk (ENLASO).
>    ... At the end of January we have the deadline to run all test
>    cases. Is that deadline (next week) realistic? We have some
>    changes, but others are stable.
>
>    Leroy: The files will remain the same, with changes after the
>    21st.
>
>    Karl: our cases are theoretically all working, but we have some
>    issues with sorting of attributes, which we don't do. That's
>    the only reason we aren't complete.
>    ... In the input attributes are source and alt. We output them
>    in that order, but the output sorts them.
>
>    Leroy: I can run my sorting function on output for you.
>
>    Stephan: Actually, it is backward, the source is in order, the
>    output isn't.
>
>    Yves: Many engines do not care about order. You have to handle
>    sorting yourselves.
>
>    Karl: It's not a big change and then we are done. I will make
>    the change myself.
>
>    Ankit: We have a few small snags.
>
>    Linguaserve: (Some issues. ???)
>
>    Thomas: We are working on our implementations, should be ready
>    next week.
>
>    David: Connection between Moravia and UL tests…
>
>    Felix: David, I know you use Okapi wrapper. When that is
>    integrated in the workflow, you can run the same tests as
>    Okapi. So now you run six cases, but you could run more then.
>
> RFC statements
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [130]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Ow
>    nership_of_rfc2119_statements
>
>     [130] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Ownership_of_rfc2119_statements
>
>    Felix: Much is covered by the schema.
>    ... #25 talks about the content of the annotatorsRef attribute.
>    Currently the data type is text. There is a need for test case
>    with a file with a non-allowed identifier and the parser says
>    it is wrong. That would test it, even though it does not
>    produce specified output.
>    ... David, could you make a test case and get the implementers
>    to run it?
>    ... See example below:
>
>    <fsasaki> annotatorsRef="mt-confidence|tool1"
>
>    <fsasaki> annotatorsRef="mtconfidence|tool1"
>
>    Felix: Second line should throw an error.
>
>    Yves: Do we have standard output for the errors?
>
>    Felix: No. This will require human verification.
>    ... We can address issues here until October.
>    ... After XML Prague would be fine.
>
>    Jirka: We can do this using Schematron with regex.
>
>    Karl: There are similar cases in the docs to do negative tests.
>
>    Jirka: It's already there, but you have to look at the
>    Schematron, not the XSD.
>    ... Doing as much as possible in Schematron.
>
>    Felix: What about #39, #35, #41?
>    ... If not checked by Schematron, please add later.
>
>    <fsasaki> ACTION: jirka to make schematron tests described at
>    [131]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Ow
>    nership_of_rfc2119_statements#Purpose [recorded in
>    [132]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action31]
>
>     [131] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Ownership_of_rfc2119_statements#Purpose
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-419 - Make schematron tests described
>    at
>    [133]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Ow
>    nership_of_rfc2119_statements#Purpose [on Jirka Kosek - due
>    2013-01-30].
>
>     [133] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Ownership_of_rfc2119_statements#Purpose
>
>    Felix: #31, if values have spaces, must be delimited with
>    quotation marks. Need a test case?
>
>    Yves: It's already covered by the test cases, which fail if the
>    output isn't formatted properly.
>
>    Felix: #36. Overriding means these won't be combined anyway.
>    Maybe make an action to delete the sentence in 8.11.2?
>
>    Action-420
>
>    Refers Issue-111
>
>    <fsasaki> ACTION: felix to make edit for issue-111 [recorded in
>    [134]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action32]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-420 - Make edit for issue-111 [on
>    Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30].
>
>    Felix: #36 is dropped.
>
>    <fsasaki> " If the type of the issue is set to uncategorized, a
>    comment MUST be specified as well." - can be checked, an error
>    if no comment is avaiable
>
>    Felix: Maybe we put the other MUST statement (about mapping
>    internal types to issue type values) as its own test type. To
>    catch the error, you must be able to parse the category.
>    ... You need to understand the values and different types or
>    markup. It is on top of the normal test suite functionality.
>
>    Yves: We don't need the MUST there. The value column covers the
>    same thing.
>
>    Discussion about where to test.
>
> test suite
>
>    <fsasaki> s/topic: test suite//
>
>    <fsasaki> "The set of characters that are allowed is specified
>    using a regular expression. That is, each character in the
>    selected content MUST be included in the set specified by the
>    regular expression."
>
>    <fsasaki> this is not a test for the processor, but for the
>    consuming application
>
>    <fsasaki> for IANA charset names see
>    [135]http://www.iana.org/assignments/character-sets/character-s
>    ets.xml
>
>     [135] http://www.iana.org/assignments/character-sets/character-sets.xml
>
>    <fsasaki> we point to the IANA list, that's it
>
>    <fsasaki> relevant for this MUST statement: "A storageEncoding
>    attribute. It contains the name of the character set encoding
>    used to calculate the number of bytes of the selected text. The
>    name MUST be one of the names or aliases listed in the IANA
>    Character Sets registry . The default value is UTF-8."
>
>    Felix: For many quality issue type items, change MUST/MUST NOT
>    to must/must not.
>    ... Numbers 45–48
>
>    <fsasaki> "See entries 45-48 at
>    [136]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Ow
>    nership_of_rfc2119_statements#Purpose these statements are not
>    verifable. Proposal is to set MUST and MUST NOT to lower case
>    to make clear that the text is just guidance."
>
>     [136] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Ownership_of_rfc2119_statements#Purpose
>
>    <fsasaki> for 45 " The values a tool implementing the data
>    category produces for the attribute MUST match one of the
>    values provided in this table and MUST be semantically
>    accurate.": re-formulate this :
>
>    <fsasaki> drop "MUST be semantically accurate".
>
>    "If a tool can map its internal values to these types it MUST
>    do so and MUST NOT use the value other, which is reserved
>    strictly for values that cannot be mapped to these values." ->
>    "Note that the other category is reserved for cases where a
>    tool-specific category cannot be mapped…"
>
>    <fsasaki> ACTION: arle to work on statements 45-48 at
>    [137]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Ow
>    nership_of_rfc2119_statements#Purpose , see prague f2f minutes
>    [recorded in
>    [138]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action33]
>
>     [137] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Ownership_of_rfc2119_statements#Purpose
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-421 - Work on statements 45-48 at
>    [139]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Ow
>    nership_of_rfc2119_statements#Purpose , see prague f2f minutes
>    [on Arle Lommel - due 2013-01-30].
>
>     [139] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Ownership_of_rfc2119_statements#Purpose
>
>    Yves pointed out that the values should be done by class, not
>    on an individual error basis independent of classes.
>
>    #48. If a system has an "miscellaneous" or "other" category, it
>    MUST be mapped to this value even if the specific instance of
>    the issue might be mapped to another category -> append note on
>    semantic accuracy here.
>
> requirements doc
>
>    <fsasaki> multi-engine domain scenario + multi engine domain
>    scenario
>
>    <fsasaki> issue-95 and issue-75 would be covered by this
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [140]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Re
>    quirements#autoLanguageProcessingRule
>
>     [140] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#autoLanguageProcessingRule
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [141]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Re
>    quirements#Process
>
>     [141] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#Process
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [142]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Re
>    quirements#formatType
>
>     [142] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#formatType
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [143]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Re
>    quirements#genre
>
>     [143] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#genre
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [144]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Re
>    quirements#purpose
>
>     [144] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#purpose
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [145]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Re
>    quirements#translatorQualification
>
>     [145] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#translatorQualification
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [146]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Re
>    quirements#register
>
>     [146] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#register
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [147]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Re
>    quirements#contentLicensingTerms
>
>     [147] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#contentLicensingTerms
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [148]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Re
>    quirements#author
>
>     [148] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#author
>
>    <fsasaki> (covered by dc.terms
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [149]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Re
>    quirements#confidentiality
>
>     [149] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#confidentiality
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [150]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Re
>    quirements#context
>
>     [150] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#context
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [151]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Re
>    quirements#languageResource
>
>     [151] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#languageResource
>
>    <swalter> for 45: Note that the other category is reserved...
>    -> Note that the "other" category is reserved to cases where a
>    tool-specific category cannot be mapped to any of the first
>    categories in a semantically accurate manner.
>
> Summary of Action Items
>
>    [NEW] ACTION: ankit to create example for xml;lang / lang
>    [recorded in
>    [152]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action09]
>    [NEW] ACTION: arle to make the edit for issue 76 [recorded in
>    [153]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action05]
>    [NEW] ACTION: Arle to resize templates for posters from A1 to
>    A0. [recorded in
>    [154]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action17]
>    [NEW] ACTION: arle to work on statements 45-48 at
>    [155]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Ow
>    nership_of_rfc2119_statements#Purpose , see prague f2f minutes
>    [recorded in
>    [156]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action33]
>    [NEW] ACTION: Dave to respond to Somnath on issue-109 to
>    explain we are looking at it to make recommendations. [recorded
>    in
>    [157]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action29]
>    [NEW] ACTION: daveL to check availability in Dublin for
>    face-to-face meeting on 17–18 June. [recorded in
>    [158]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action15]
>    [NEW] ACTION: DaveL to go back to Somnath on issue-108 to
>    explain why we won't address it. [recorded in
>    [159]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action28]
>    [NEW] ACTION: daveL to reply to Richard [recorded in
>    [160]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action13]
>    [NEW] ACTION: DaveL to respond to Somnath on issue-109 to
>    explain we are looking at it to make recommendations. [recorded
>    in
>    [161]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action30]
>    [NEW] ACTION: dLewis6 to come back to chase and kevin about
>    discussion of issue-71
>    [162]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-irc#T08-34-49
>    [recorded in
>    [163]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action01]
>    [NEW] ACTION: Felix is to check availability of Berlin on 17–18
>    June. [recorded in
>    [164]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action14]
>    [NEW] ACTION: felix to add links to examples for issue 80
>    [recorded in
>    [165]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action07]
>    [NEW] ACTION: Felix to answer Richard to indicate we'll address
>    this with a rule file in BP [recorded in
>    [166]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action11]
>    [NEW] ACTION: felix to change example
>    [167]http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#EX-its-tool-a
>    nnotation-1 if the agree on issue-71 , see discussion at
>    [168]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-irc#T08-34-49
>    [recorded in
>    [169]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action02]
>    [NEW] ACTION: Felix to check for clarification on Issue-88
>    [recorded in
>    [170]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action18]
>    [NEW] ACTION: felix to check what of lang and xml;lang takes
>    precedence [recorded in
>    [171]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action08]
>    [NEW] ACTION: Felix to draft non-normative section clarifying
>    relations to HTML for issue 89 [recorded in
>    [172]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action12]
>    [NEW] ACTION: Felix to ensure that there is no MUST in any
>    notes. [recorded in
>    [173]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action19]
>    [NEW] ACTION: Felix to follow up with Christian on tekom as an
>    option. [recorded in
>    [174]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action16]
>    [NEW] ACTION: felix to go back to richard about new resolution
>    for issue-79 [recorded in
>    [175]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action06]
>    [NEW] ACTION: Felix to let Norbert know that action-95 is out
>    of scope. [recorded in
>    [176]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action23]
>    [NEW] ACTION: Felix to make edit for issue-100 and get back to
>    Norbert. [recorded in
>    [177]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action25]
>    [NEW] ACTION: felix to make edit for issue-111 [recorded in
>    [178]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action32]
>    [NEW] ACTION: Felix to update unicode reference for issue-104
>    [recorded in
>    [179]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action26]
>    [NEW] ACTION: Jirka to change localization quality,
>    localization rating, mt confidence, term confidence, and
>    disambig confidence to use double rather than decimal and
>    respond to Henry (Issue-94) [recorded in
>    [180]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action22]
>    [NEW] ACTION: Jirka to find data on CSS and XPath selectors
>    conversion libraries and keep CSS selectors in the spec.
>    [recorded in
>    [181]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action24]
>    [NEW] ACTION: jirka to make edit for issue-77 [recorded in
>    [182]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action04]
>    [NEW] ACTION: jirka to make schematron tests described at
>    [183]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Ow
>    nership_of_rfc2119_statements#Purpose [recorded in
>    [184]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action31]
>    [NEW] ACTION: Jirka to write to Henry on issue-93 and make the
>    change in the text. [recorded in
>    [185]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action21]
>    [NEW] ACTION: Karl to propose solution to Norbert and then
>    Felix can add to spec. [recorded in
>    [186]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action27]
>    [NEW] ACTION: tadej to check disambiguation examples with
>    regards to presence of annotatorsRef [recorded in
>    [187]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action03]
>    [NEW] ACTION: yves to enter the new text for 97 (above)
>    [recorded in
>    [188]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action10]
>    [NEW] ACTION: Yves to follow up with Richard and Norbert on
>    issue-92 and issue-103. [recorded in
>    [189]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action20]
>
>     [155] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Ownership_of_rfc2119_statements#Purpose
>     [162] http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-irc#T08-34-49
>     [167] http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#EX-its-tool-annotation-1
>     [168] http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-irc#T08-34-49
>     [183] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Ownership_of_rfc2119_statements#Purpose
>
>    [End of minutes]
>      __________________________________________________________
>
>
>     Minutes formatted by David Booth's [190]scribe.perl version
>     1.137 ([191]CVS log)
>     $Date: 2013-01-27 19:40:15 $
>
>     [190] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
>     [191] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
>
>
>
> =====
> DAY2
> =====
>
>    [1]W3C
>
>       [1] http://www.w3.org/
>
>                                - DRAFT -
>
>                                mlw-lt f2f
>
> 24 Jan 2013
>
>    [2]Agenda
>
>       [2] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/PragueJan2013f2f#Thursday
>
>    See also: [3]IRC log
>
>       [3] http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-mlw-lt-irc
>
> Attendees
>
>    Present
>           Arle, tadej, Jirka, DaveLewis, Marcis, Ankit, leroy,
>           Yves, mdelolmo, pnietoca, Karl, swalter, truedesheim,
>           dF, christian(remote 11-12), felix, Milan
>
>    Regrets
>    Chair
>           felix
>
>    Scribe
>           fsasaki, dF, daveL
>
> Contents
>
>      * [4]Topics
>          1. [5]issue-113
>          2. [6]rome + xml prague prep
>          3. [7]disambiguation and terminology again
>          4. [8]action item and issue review
>          5. [9]BP publications
>          6. [10]meeting schedule
>          7. [11]final event ideas
>          8. [12]best practices
>          9. [13]disambiguation again
>      * [14]Summary of Action Items
>      __________________________________________________________
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>    lt-comments/2013Jan/0123.html
>
>      [15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0123.html
>
> issue-113
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [16]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>    lt-comments/2013Jan/0123.html
>
>      [16] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0123.html
>
>    <fsasaki> ACTION: arle to do copy-edtiing on the spec - due 1
>    april [recorded in
>    [17]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action01]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-422 - do copy-edtiing on the spec [on
>    Arle Lommel - due 2013-04-01].
>
>    <fsasaki> ACTION: felix to to edits for issue-113 [recorded in
>    [18]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action02]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-423 - To edits for issue-113 [on
>    Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-31].
>
>    <fsasaki> "Information (e.g. "translate this") captured by ITS
>    markup (e.g. its:translate='yes') always pertains to one or
>    more XML or HTML nodes (primarily element and attribute nodes).
>    "
>
>    <fsasaki> scribe: fsasaki
>
>    <pnietoca> I found another typo
>
>    <pnietoca> on section 5.8 the paragraph before example 26
>
>    <pnietoca> says: On any given node, the information provided by
>    this mechanism is a space-separated list of the accumulated
>    references found "it" the annotatorsRef attributes declared in
>    the enclosing elements and sorted by data category identifiers.
>    For each data category, the IRI part is the one of the
>    inner-most "declarartion".
>
>    <pnietoca> found "it" the annotatorsRef > it should be in
>
>    <pnietoca> declarartion should be declaration
>
>    <Arle> I just raised an issue for what you found:
>    [19]https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/i
>    ssues/114
>
>      [19] https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/114
>
>    <Arle> ACTION: Arle to fix section 8.9 note: "since the extra
>    training resources does not justify the improvement in the
>    output." -> "since the extra training resources do not justify
>    the improvement in the output." [recorded in
>    [20]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action03]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-424 - Fix section 8.9 note: "since
>    the extra training resources does not justify the improvement
>    in the output." -> "since the extra training resources do not
>    justify the improvement in the output." [on Arle Lommel - due
>    2013-01-31].
>
>    [21]https://github.com/finnle/ITS-2.0-Testsuite/blob/master/its
>    2.0/inputdata/domain/html/domain1htmlrules.xml
>
>      [21] https://github.com/finnle/ITS-2.0-Testsuite/blob/master/its2.0/inputdata/domain/html/domain1htmlrules.xml
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: ankit to change test suite for domain in HTML
>    [22]https://github.com/finnle/ITS-2.0-Testsuite/tree/master/its
>    2.0/inputdata/domain/html , that is have "keywords" instead of
>    "description" in the HTML and rules files [recorded in
>    [23]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action04]
>
>      [22] https://github.com/finnle/ITS-2.0-Testsuite/tree/master/its2.0/inputdata/domain/html
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-425 - Change test suite for domain in
>    HTML
>    [24]https://github.com/finnle/ITS-2.0-Testsuite/tree/master/its
>    2.0/inputdata/domain/html , that is have "keywords" instead of
>    "description" in the HTML and rules files [on Ankit Srivastava
>    - due 2013-01-31].
>
>      [24] https://github.com/finnle/ITS-2.0-Testsuite/tree/master/its2.0/inputdata/domain/html
>
>    <Yves_>
>    [25]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>    lt-comments/2013Jan/0158.html
>
>      [25] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0158.html
>
>    <pnietoca> thanks Arle
>
> rome + xml prague prep
>
>    [26]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-multilingualweb
>    -lt/2013Jan/0000.html
>
>      [26] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-multilingualweb-lt/2013Jan/0000.html
>
>    <Arle> Arle: I will be submitting new templates for the
>    posters. They had been A1 size, but we are going for A0. Links
>    will be sent out soon.
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: arle to create an indicator for poster
>    relations [recorded in
>    [27]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action05]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-426 - Create an indicator for poster
>    relations [on Arle Lommel - due 2013-01-31].
>
>    <scribe> ACTION: felix to nudge people for a first poster draft
>    - 28 february [recorded in
>    [28]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action06]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-427 - Nudge people for a first poster
>    draft - 28 february [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-31].
>
> disambiguation and terminology again
>
>    [29]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
>    lt-comments/2013Jan/0163.html
>
>      [29] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0163.html
>
>    <scribe> scribe: fsasaki
>
>    <dF> scribe: dF
>
>    Tadej: showing slides
>    ... seems there is a way that would not compromise ITS 1.0 term
>    ... several different attributes, now with two categories
>    ... simultaneous annotations on multiple granularity levels are
>    not possible
>    ... currecntly, fragment is in relationship with a URI
>    ... but term is flag
>    ... Scenario A
>    ... term remains flag, but becomes a new granularity within
>    disambiguation.
>
>    Issues: ... multiple annotations still not possible
>
>    Felix: clarification, this should be possible through
>    concatenated values
>
>    Tadej: Ugly but doable as an excercise..
>
>    Marcis: we discussed that
>
>    Tadej: did not seem a good idea
>
>    Another suggestion leading to B
>
>    scribe: granularitoes make sense indepenedently
>    ... terminology is just one level
>    ... having a set of attributes for every level
>    ... lots of new attributes
>    ... BUT everything can be done simultaneously and independently
>    ... multivalues seemed to require black magic to implement,
>    gets ugly fast
>    ... decided to keep cardinality at 1
>
>    Scenario B
>
>    scribe: Keep terminology, drop granularity
>    ... encode the levels stright in attributes
>
>    Felix: clarification, separate data category identifier for
>    each level?
>
>    Tadej: basically, yes, oterwise we would need subcategories
>    ... but the same pattern is always repeated, this should be
>    good for adoption
>    ... it would be just a refactoring job
>
>    swalter: danger of semantic contradictions
>    ... but it id not the formats issue to try and prevent this
>
>    Tadej: we were trying to avoid the host of the different
>    attributes by introducing glanurity
>
>    Yves: is it a single data category, or four?
>
>    Tadej: technically they are different from the modelling point
>    of view, but they have same pattern, so can be grouped
>    ... but they are independent in a sence and can go standalone..
>
>    Felix: What about implementation commitments? Do we enforce
>    implementing all four, if one committs for one?
>
>    tadej: all it seems, but it is not requesting too much as they
>    really are the same mechanism
>
>    <Arle> (Off topic, but poster templates are here:
>    [30]https://dl.dropbox.com/u/223919/lt-web/RomeWorkshop/PosterT
>    emplateA0.pptx [PowerPoint] and
>    [31]https://dl.dropbox.com/u/223919/lt-web/RomeWorkshop/PosterT
>    emplateA0.pdf [PDF].)
>
>      [30] https://dl.dropbox.com/u/223919/lt-web/RomeWorkshop/PosterTemplateA0.pptx
>      [31] https://dl.dropbox.com/u/223919/lt-web/RomeWorkshop/PosterTemplateA0.pdf
>
>    tadej: they do not have different behaviors
>
>    Felix: are Christian's concerns addressed with this?
>    ... the starting point was wondering about the relationship
>    between term and disambiguation
>
>    <fsasaki> tadej: we would simply rename things, but not break
>    the model of term
>
>    <fsasaki> felix: how does scneario b relate to terminology?
>
>    <fsasaki> tadej: terminolgoy already conforms to the pattern of
>    scenario b, that is why we said we keep it as is
>
>    <fsasaki> dave: we could not touch terminology at all
>
>    <fsasaki> .. the use cases that we want could all be done in
>    disambiguation
>
>    <fsasaki> .. so we keep terminology but say that we can do
>    everything now in disambiguation
>
>    <fsasaki> tadej: if there is a know term, would you use
>    termInfoRef or disambigXxxRef?
>
>    <fsasaki> .. the relationships in disambiguation is in one
>    pattern
>
>    <fsasaki> .. and term already follows the pattern already
>
>    <fsasaki> .. how to handle that in terms of data categories is
>    a differetent aspect
>
>    <daveL> scribe: daveL
>
>    christian: core of my point related to different levels of
>    attribute for different annotaiton, ontology, lexical etc
>    ... confirms that the proposal related to different data
>    categories for these different levels
>
>    tadej: one exception to common pattern in entity class ref
>    beign part of entity class
>
>    christian: to be satisfied, is what do we do with the current
>    class of terminology
>    ... would suggest giving guidance by deprecating term through
>    best practice advice
>
>    felix: why would we deprecate the term option
>
>    christian: meant depricating the current data term category
>
>    felix: thing to proposal is that term is already following the
>    pattern the proposed pattern, so it wouldn't changed
>
>    tadej: suggested options are having term as a disambig option
>    or as keep term as it is for this
>
>    dave: could have both and as christian suggests give guideance
>    on which oen to adopt of how to transation from term to term in
>    disambiugate
>
>    tadej: having both raises the issue that term could say 'yes'
>    while disambig term option sa no, how should this be handled
>
>    stephan: could be addressed at a schematron validation level
>
>    felix: asks for input from implementors, but no strong
>    perferences forthcoming
>
>    tadej: note that this approach results in lots of new attribute
>    ... also propose a catch all 'keyword' for things that don't
>    fit into the defined categories
>    ... some fragement of text that is important for someone
>
>    christian: its good to consider support additional classes of
>    analysis, but this isn't part of the comment to date
>
>    felix: summarise, we don't have examples, spec text and
>    commitment to implement for this proposal
>    ... this requires some considerable effort before we are in a
>    position to gt consensus
>    ... asks do the proposers have time to work on this to get it
>    mature enough to even ask on consensus
>
>    Christian: allocating time for me is difficult
>
>    felix: as chair we really need to see this topic advance before
>    we can ask concensus. It really needed by next week or two.
>    ... in order to hit a last call draft end february
>
>    Christian: does this proposal address the hiearchical NER issue
>    raised by colleagues in India
>
>    tadej: this is orthogonal, so ti doesn't solve problem
>
>    stephan: can we agree on name, an acronym is really useful
>
>    felix: can people complete work in the time
>
>    yves: sceptical that this can be done in time given the amount
>    of time and work involved in disambig to date
>    ... suggest that we go forward with other comments related to
>    dismabig anyway, so these are not held up by looking at this
>    proposal
>
>    dF: this would be a definite substantive change requiring a
>    frther last call
>
>    felix: there are other that are borderline
>
> action item and issue review
>
>    <fsasaki> issue-67: DECISION-DETAILS: substantive borderline
>    change
>
>    <trackbot> Notes added to ISSUE-67 Change definition of regular
>    expression for allowed characters.
>
>    <fsasaki> issue-68: DECISION-DETAILS: under discussion
>
>    <trackbot> Notes added to ISSUE-68 Disambiguation (and term).
>
>    <fsasaki> issue-71: DECISION-DETAILS: resolution to be
>    clarified
>
>    <trackbot> Notes added to ISSUE-71 Section 5.8 (annotatorsRef).
>
>    <fsasaki> issue-72: DECISION-DETAILS: follow-up needed
>
>    <trackbot> Notes added to ISSUE-72 Section 8.12 (Provenance
>    Data Category).
>
>    <fsasaki> issue-73: DECISION-DETAILS: follow-up needed
>
>    <trackbot> Notes added to ISSUE-73 NIF comments.
>
>    <fsasaki> issue-73: DECISION-DETAILS: follow-up needed
>
>    <trackbot> Notes added to ISSUE-73 NIF comments.
>
>    <fsasaki> issue-72: DECISION-DETAILS: clarification
>
>    <trackbot> Notes added to ISSUE-72 Section 8.12 (Provenance
>    Data Category).
>
>    <fsasaki> issue-102: DECISION-DETAILS: borderline substantive
>
>    <trackbot> Notes added to ISSUE-102 I18N-ISSUE-242: Clarify
>    case-insensitive match for domains [ITS-20].
>
>    <fsasaki> issue-110: DECISION-DETAILS: borderline substantive
>
>    <trackbot> Notes added to ISSUE-110 change to langRule:
>    precedence of xml:lang and lang.
>
>    <fsasaki> close action-36
>
>    <trackbot> Closed ACTION-36 Ongoing social media outreach of
>    mlw.
>
>    <fsasaki> action-215?
>
>    <trackbot> ACTION-215 -- David Filip to generate a sample of
>    testing involving XLIFF -- due 2013-02-04 -- OPEN
>
>    <trackbot>
>    [32]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/ac
>    tions/215
>
>      [32] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/actions/215
>
>    <fsasaki> close action-309
>
>    <trackbot> Closed ACTION-309 pick up disambiguation
>    granuliartiy best practices topic later.
>
>    <fsasaki> covered by ongoing disambig+term discussion
>
>    <fsasaki> close actoin-342
>
>    <fsasaki> close action-342
>
>    <trackbot> Closed ACTION-342 create mt confidence score example
>    as described in
>    [33]http://www.w3.org/2012/11/29-mlw-lt-irc#T14-50-33.
>
>      [33] http://www.w3.org/2012/11/29-mlw-lt-irc#T14-50-33.
>
>    <fsasaki> above not needed anymore
>
>    <fsasaki> close action-352
>
>    <trackbot> Closed ACTION-352 Prepare status report on Task 5.1.
>
>    <fsasaki> close action-353
>
>    <trackbot> Closed ACTION-353 Prepare status report on Task 5.2.
>
>    <fsasaki> close action-354
>
>    <trackbot> Closed ACTION-354 provide input about wp1.
>
>    <fsasaki> above done or tracked by felix
>
>    <fsasaki> close action-374
>
>    <trackbot> Closed ACTION-374 Distribute action items to define
>    these tests and to provide guideance of how to formulate these
>    tests against rcf2119 table.
>
>    <fsasaki> close action-376
>
>    <trackbot> Closed ACTION-376 Pull this material on best
>    practice together onto wiki for people to comment on.
>
>    <fsasaki> not needed for BP work now, covered with new tracker
>    product
>    [34]https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/p
>    roducts/9
>
>      [34] https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/products/9
>
>    <fsasaki> close action-384
>
>    <trackbot> Closed ACTION-384 Make agenda proposal for Prague
>    meeting about the XML prague day.
>
>    <fsasaki> close action-386
>
>    <trackbot> Closed ACTION-386 Contact original commenter and see
>    whether Yves additions to comment are what was meant there.
>
>    <fsasaki> above done
>
>    <fsasaki> close action-387
>
>    <trackbot> Closed ACTION-387 Contact original commenter about
>    real need of timestamp.
>
>    <fsasaki> above done
>
>    <fsasaki> close action-388
>
>    <trackbot> Closed ACTION-388 Come back to chase and kevin about
>    discussion of issue-71
>    [35]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-irc#T08-34-49.
>
>      [35] http://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-irc#T08-34-49.
>
>    <fsasaki> above done
>
>    <fsasaki> close action-402
>
>    <trackbot> Closed ACTION-402 Fix text and algo for domain case
>    mapping.
>
>    <fsasaki> above done, including test cases
>
>    <fsasaki> close action-403
>
>    <trackbot> Closed ACTION-403 Check availability of Berlin on
>    17–18 June for face-to-face meeting..
>
>    <fsasaki> close action-406
>
>    <trackbot> Closed ACTION-406 Resize templates for posters from
>    A1 to A0..
>
>    <fsasaki> close action-409
>
>    <trackbot> Closed ACTION-409 Follow up with Richard and Norbert
>    on issue-92 and issue-103..
>
>    <fsasaki> borderline "another last call cases": issue-63,
>    issue-67
>
>    <fsasaki> issue-71
>
>    <trackbot> ISSUE-71 -- Section 5.8 (annotatorsRef) -- open
>
>    <trackbot>
>    [36]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/is
>    sues/71
>
>      [36] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/71
>
>    <fsasaki> issue-102
>
>    <trackbot> ISSUE-102 -- I18N-ISSUE-242: Clarify
>    case-insensitive match for domains [ITS-20] -- open
>
>    <trackbot>
>    [37]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/is
>    sues/102
>
>      [37] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/102
>
>    <fsasaki> issue-110
>
>    <trackbot> ISSUE-110 -- change to langRule: precedence of
>    xml:lang and lang -- open
>
>    <trackbot>
>    [38]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/is
>    sues/110
>
>      [38] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/110
>
>    <fsasaki> and, in addition:
>
>    <fsasaki> issue-68
>
>    <trackbot> ISSUE-68 -- Disambiguation (and term) -- open
>
>    <trackbot>
>    [39]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/is
>    sues/68
>
>      [39] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/68
>
>    <fsasaki> daveF: quite a number of borderline, so we might need
>    another last call, let's check with the mgmt
>
>    <fsasaki> felix: two unknowns: ruby and directionality related
>    comments
>
>    <fsasaki> daveF: even if we went to antother LC, I wouldn't
>    change term and dissambiugation
>
>    <fsasaki> felix: worried about implementation committments for
>    terminology and dissambig
>
>    <fsasaki> marcis: we have three for both terminology and
>    disambiguation
>
>    <fsasaki> daveF: clean solution would require 4 categories
>
>    <fsasaki> marcis: and at the end it would be dropped
>
>    <fsasaki> felix: I don't see consensus on how to move forward
>
>    <fsasaki> .. let's see what the next weeks bring
>
> BP publications
>
>    <fsasaki> discussing where to publish BP documents - TR space,
>    via i18n WG, via ITS IG
>
> meeting schedule
>
>    <fsasaki> f2f in bled and dublin confirmed
>
>    <Arle> Send any presentations missing from
>    [40]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/2012-ann
>    ual-report/presentations.html to Arle
>
>      [40] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/2012-annual-report/presentations.html
>
>    <fsasaki> ACTION: felix to come back to links to implemenations
>    - due 28 Feburary [recorded in
>    [41]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action07]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-428 - come back to links to
>    implemenations [on Felix Sasaki - due 1970-01-01].
>
> final event ideas
>
>    <fsasaki> yves: would be difficiutl to gather same crowd we
>    have in rome 6 months later in europe
>
>    <fsasaki> .. there are events at the end of the year in the
>    states, e.g. Uncode / locworld etc. wich we could target
>
>    <fsasaki> .. so we could try to do something as a group
>
>    <fsasaki> .. use that as a complement to the european outreach
>    we will do in Rome
>
>    <fsasaki> unicode conf. is 21-13 october
>
> best practices
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [42]https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/p
>    roducts/9
>
>      [42] https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/products/9
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [43]https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/p
>    roducts/8
>
>      [43] https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/products/8
>
>    <fsasaki> xliff - ITS relation
>
>    <fsasaki> disambiguation vs. term (depending on current
>    discussion)
>
>    <fsasaki> mapping to provenance - dave
>
>    <fsasaki> xliff vs. ITS - dave, david, yves
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [44]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/XLI
>    FF_Mapping
>
>      [44] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/XLIFF_Mapping
>
>    <fsasaki> localization quality issue / rating related BP -
>    arle, this summer, related to QTLaunchpad
>
>    <fsasaki> how to use (populate & consume) mt-confidence and
>    domain - ankit
>
>    <fsasaki> above would include about m4loc
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [45]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Use
>    _cases_-_high_level_summary
>
>      [45] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Use_cases_-_high_level_summary
>
>    <fsasaki> how to use storage size - stephan
>
>    <fsasaki> high level summary based on
>    [46]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Use
>    _cases_-_high_level_summary - felix
>
>      [46] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Use_cases_-_high_level_summary
>
>    <fsasaki>
>    [47]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Del
>    iverables
>
>      [47] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Deliverables
>
>    <fsasaki> co-ordinate EU reports
>    [48]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Del
>    iverables with BP documents
>
>      [48] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Deliverables
>
>    <fsasaki> [49]http://www.w3.org/2008/12/its-extensions
>
>      [49] http://www.w3.org/2008/12/its-extensions
>
>    <fsasaki> ACTION: felix to check xliff ITS mapping namespace
>    hosting in w3c [recorded in
>    [50]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action08]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-429 - Check xliff ITS mapping
>    namespace hosting in w3c [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-31].
>
>    <fsasaki> use of term - stephan, tadej and marcis. Depends on
>    how we proceed with term vs. disambiguation issue
>
> disambiguation again
>
>    <fsasaki> tadej: need to clarify: do we need granularity at
>    all?
>
>    <fsasaki> .. if not, we don't need to merge disambiguation and
>    terminonlogy
>
>    <fsasaki> .. will ask that question on the list
>
>    <fsasaki> thanks to all for the meeting, adjourned!
>
> Summary of Action Items
>
>    [NEW] ACTION: ankit to change test suite for domain in HTML
>    https://github.com/finnle/ITS-2.0-Testsuite/tree/master/its2.0/
>    inputdata/domain/html , that is have "keywords" instead of
>    "description" in the HTML and rules files [recorded in
>    [51]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action04]
>    [NEW] ACTION: arle to create an indicator for poster relations
>    [recorded in
>    [52]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action05]
>    [NEW] ACTION: arle to do copy-edtiing on the spec - due 1 april
>    [recorded in
>    [53]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action01]
>    [NEW] ACTION: Arle to fix section 8.9 note: "since the extra
>    training resources does not justify the improvement in the
>    output." -> "since the extra training resources do not justify
>    the improvement in the output." [recorded in
>    [54]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action03]
>    [NEW] ACTION: felix to check xliff ITS mapping namespace
>    hosting in w3c [recorded in
>    [55]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action08]
>    [NEW] ACTION: felix to come back to links to implemenations -
>    due 28 Feburary [recorded in
>    [56]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action07]
>    [NEW] ACTION: felix to nudge people for a first poster draft -
>    28 february [recorded in
>    [57]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action06]
>    [NEW] ACTION: felix to to edits for issue-113 [recorded in
>    [58]http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action02]
>
>    [End of minutes]
>      __________________________________________________________
>
>
>     Minutes formatted by David Booth's [59]scribe.perl version
>     1.137 ([60]CVS log)
>     $Date: 2013-01-27 19:40:15 $
>
>      [59] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
>      [60] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
>
>
>
Received on Sunday, 27 January 2013 22:01:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:08:26 UTC