Minutes 2005-04-28: ITS teleconference

Minutes 2005-04-28: ITS teleconference

ATTENDEES:

- TF: Tim Foster (Sun)
- RI: Richard Ishida (W3C)
- MI: Masaki Itagaki (Invited Expert)
- CL: Christian Lieske (SAP)
- FS: Felix Sasaki (W3C)
- DS: Diane Stoick (Boeing)
- AZ: Andrzej Zydron (Invited Expert)
- YS: Yves Savourel (ENLASO)

REGRETS:

- NN: Naoyuki Nomura (Ricoh)

AGENDA:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-its/2005AprJun/0008.html



=== PREVIOUS ACTION ITEMS:

- All to comment on the existing work items, and for the authors to continue improving drafts as needed.
Done: See the various wiki pages for the feedback.

- RI to look for contact person with Atom.
Not done yet --> action item for next time.

- YS to follow-up in trying to contact Don Day (DITA chair) to see if anyone in their group could work with ITS.
Done: Don kindly answered. YS to post a summary in the Members list.

- YS to post the glossary page.
Done (http://www.w3.org/International/its/glossary.html)
YS asked if additional definitions could be added.
CL to add an entry for "data category"
FS to add an entry for "schema language"
RI mentioned that some definitions should be discussed at the I18N Activity level since other groups were also discussing
definitions for some of the same terms (e.g. "internationalization"). He will bring up the question of using a glossary for the
Activity to the other groups.
CL suggested to transform the page into a wiki page so we can all easily modify it.
YS to make the conversion to wiki page.

- YS to post the wiki process page (adapted from the GEO process).
Not done yet --> action item for next time.

- CL to look at example of term identifications mechanisms in existing markups.
Done: See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its/2005AprJun/0094.html
CL summarized his findings, then we discussed them.
The discussions was related to:
. "Term Identification" (http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0503ReqTermIdentification)
. And "Purpose specification/Mapping" (http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0504ReqPurposeSpecMap)
RI noted that we have to understand the usage of the terms, and that we may not have the right granularity.
MI noted that ITS could set a possible tag set for terms, and in addition provide mapping mechanism for using existing systems.
TF and YS mentioned that the mapping mechanism should go beyond the term identification case, and could apply to other existing tags
covering other requirements.
FS ask if we were concerned only with context term or term+definitions.
CL so far has not looked into possibly mapping something like HTML's <dl> structure.
MI will try to re-work the requirement to take in account the discussion.

- RI to ask to the appropriate W3C contact how to handle feedback from non-WG-members.
The contact was not available --> action item for next time.

- All who have not done it yet: go to one of the Wiki page (e.g. http://esw.w3.org/topic/itsHowTo) and register as a user. Then send
the user name to Richard so he can add you to the security user list.
Done for some. Still a few not registered.


=== WIKI

RI noted that GEO was now using a different way to add comments in the wiki pages: "[[", then the initial, then the comments, then
"]]" to close the comments. This allows to make inline notes and also to make larger comments spanning several paragraphs. The
drawback is that they are less visible.
See an example here: http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0504ReqTechWriter.
It was decided to try this new style and see how it works out.


=== DISCUSSION ON THE REQUIREMENTS:

We discussed the "Authoring Content" usage scenario
(http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0504ReqTechWriter)
and the "Terminology Creation and Translation" usage scenario
(http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0504ReqTermCreationTrans)
AZ provided example of how ITS would be used with "stock" (Authoring content).
Beyond the actual content of those items, we discussed the usage scenario approach itself:
RI wondered if approaching the scenario from a "persona" viewpoint would be better (like in user interface design). TF provided some
information on "Use Case" in UML. MI and YS mentioned that the current approach was trying to provide some information to the
readers to in which situations ITS may be useful.
CL noted that "use case" had a very specific meaning that was probably not reflecting what we are doing and that "usage scenario" is
probably better.
We discussed whether each requirement could have its use case. MI noted that we could cover many of them in a few scenarios. Many
thought that using a persona approach or another approach was ok as long as it was the section was clear. YS will try to either add
a new usage scenario or modify one of the existing one using the persona approach.



=== OTHER BUSINESS:

- CL asked how we were doing time-wise with regard to our milestones. YS said the first draft of the Requirements document is due in
May. He still think we can make it but underlined the need to work through the wiki and mailing list as much as possible between
meetings.

- Next teleconference is May-05 at 14:00 UTC.



=== ACTION ITEMS:

- All, as usual, to comment on the existing work items, and for the authors to continue improving their drafts as needed.

- RI to look for contact person with Atom.

- YS to post a summary of Don's email (DITA TC Chair) in the members list.

- YS to convert the glossary page into a wiki page so all can contribute.

- CL to add a glossary entry for "data category".

- FS to add a glossary entry for "schema language".

- RI to bring up the question of shared glossary in the other groups of the I18N Activity.

- YS to post the wiki process page (adapted from the GEO process).

- RI to ask to the appropriate W3C contact how to handle feedback from non-WG-members.

- All who have not done it yet: go to one of the Wiki page (e.g. http://esw.w3.org/topic/itsHowTo) and register as a user. Then send
the user name to Richard so he can add you to the security user list.

- Volunteers: to take ownership of one or more requirement and start to define it more formally.


Cheers,
-yves