JLReq TF meeting notes 2022-5-17

JLReq TF meeting notes 2022-5-17

UTC submission re:UAX50
UTC requested additional information to our proposal (*1, *2). We believe the necessary additional information would be more about the market requirements / impacts. Kobayashi-san wrote up a draft with submissions from stake holders (Mizuno-san from Iwata Font, Tahara-san from Toppan Printing, Tajima-san from Sanyosha, Murata-san from Daisy Consortium. waiting for input from Tamaru-san from Microsoft).
*1 https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2021/21222-uax50-harmony.pdf
*2 https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2022/22022-cjk-unihan-group-utc170.pdf

Further discussions will be done at the JLReq TF mailing list + Font SIG. Kida to schedule the meeting.
Additional information would be amendment, leaving the original proposal mostly as-is.
Murata-san to write up the amendment based on the Kobayashi-san’s document.
Tamaru-san is not a JLReq TF member. Will be OK for him to join the discussion and meeting. The deliverable does not belong to W3C. It would be co-authoring by key members like the initial submission was so.
It would be better to add analysis of impacts to Microsoft fonts. It would be a separate sheet.
There is one character that might need to be added to the proposal depending on how UAX50 is interpreted. Kida to dig up the discussion with Ishii-san and report.

Other points
Request, in the document, that we want UTC to invite the key members to the discussions.
Add email address so they can find our contact easily.

JDLreq (tentative name)’s repository name :D
Richard did not like “DLReq-J”. The team came up with “JLReq-D” came up as an alternative. Kida to communicate to Richard.

JDLreq contents
Kida explained his ideas about the overall structure of JDLReq. Roughly it has three parts. He wants the first section to be basic and interesting to read, something that invites readers to read more. The middle section would be the meat of the document. how we show priorities? The last part would have advanced topics, including issues with Japanese line layout on the base line system, unresolved issues that are new in digital / accessibility and yet to be explored, etc.
Nat wants to educate readers of the traditional (and correct) Japanese layout based on the virtual body.
What is Kihon-hanmen in reflowable architecture?
Kobayashi-san wants it to be digitally native, based on the reflowable architecture.
He is wondering if/how the dialog style of writing can be utilised to make it more approachable.
Kida expects it will not be something comprehensive and complete because digital text is in many ways still in progress. It needs to be a set of requirements but at the same time it will have open ended questions.
Bin-sensei explained that his write up (sent on 3/10) is a knowledge dump and the content needs to be distributed according to the structure of the document.
Comparisons between Latin and Japanese layout would be a good introductory content.
Line length relative to the font size would be an important topic to discuss.
It is common issue across all languages (Murakami-san to send out details)
The document will end up containing many points that are common across all or multiple languages. It would be a good thing (Kida)
Let’s make discussions on concrete examples as we make progress on the content (Kobayashi-san).
Kida to send out the top level structure / content to clarify his idea.


Other topics
Key members of font related specifications are: the css working group, UTC, SC29 (jpeg/mpeg). Not much discussions at SC29. We might want to change it.

TODO
Kida to schedule the Font SIG.
Murata-san to write up the amendment based on Kobayashi-san’s document.
Kida to send the proposal for the top level contents of JDLreq.
Kida to ask Richard re:what he thinks about the new name proposal: JLReq-D.

Next meeting
6/14 Tuesday 10 am
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––