[All] f2f minutes day 2, action item and issue clean up and questions

Hi all,

I made some AI and issue clean up, see below, based on the f2f outcome. The
minutes of day two are also below. I may have made mistakes, please check.


action-164 Create an RDF ontology for ITS, and make sure that we update the
ITS XSD to accomodate the RDF output created via ACTION-147
closed since there is nobody moving this forward. Sebastian Hellmann asked
Tadej, Maxime and I in an offline mail (sorry for disclosing this here,
Sebastian) but I don't see time for this.

action-179 Work with Olaf-Michael to help draft blurb for international
Open for a long time, closing now.

action-257 Propose extensible of note to support ITS type to XLIFF TC
action-259 Review names of new attributes for XLIFF<->ITS mapping to ensure
understandability and consistency
Assume that these two can be closed, otherwise let me know, David.

action-262 write note about allowed characters issue with help from
Mauricio and karl

action-264 Follow up on domain list topic with DCU closed

action-269  David Lewis to check with Phil what his preference was between
quality issue locally with inline and script-based stand off
I would suggest that if we don't get feedback by next week Monday, we drop
the inline version

action-273 Discuss casing issue with Lucy Software

action-276  Send XLIFF 2.0 spec to Richard
I assume done - David?

action-280 Edit the spec to unique standoff markup closed
Not needed anymore given

action-283 Felix to integrate dave's email about standoff mechanism for
provenance into spec
Dave, can you send me a pointer about this?

I closed below issues, please protest if this is wrong.

issue-22 Provenance and agents . Covered by editing action items related to
standoff and name of the data category. A question here: I think we agreed
on the f2f to rename the data category to just provenance and to change the
attribute names accordingly, e.g.
Is this correct?

issue-29 Please comment the possible solutions for HTML+ITS2.0 to HTML (and |
embedded by | embedding) RDF. Done, but without ontology.
issue-50 The dir attribute in HTML5 does not have the same value as in ITS
(will be done via Felix' action-250)
issue-54 ITS MIME Type (will be done via Felix' action-251)
issue-57 Allow for absolute location paths (will be done via Felix'



      [1] http://www.w3.org/

                               - DRAFT -

                            MLW-LT f2f day 2

02 Nov 2012


      [2] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/LyonNov2012#Friday_2nd_Nov:_MLW-LT_WG_meeting_agenda

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2012/11/02-mlw-lt-irc


          Ankit, Bert, Clemens, Dave, David, Dom,
          Fantasai_(dir/ruby), Felix, Fredrik, Karl,
          Kojii_(dir/ruby), Leroy, Matthias, Milan, Moritz,
          Mārcis, Naoto(remote), Norbert_(dir/ruby), Pablo,
          Richard_(dir/ruby), SebastianSk, Tadej(remote),
          Yves(remote), jirka, matthiasK, mauricio, mhellwig,
          pablo, pedro, renatb


          DomJones, fsasaki, mhellwig, Milan


     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]agenda review
         2. [6]meeting with i18n wg
         3. [7]domain lower casing
         4. [8]Marcis' commments (part 1)
         5. [9]reconvene with Marcis' comments
         6. [10]Planning for 2013
         7. [11]action item and issue review
         8. [12]XLIFF Mapping Meeting [Issue-55]
     * [13]Summary of Action Items

agenda review

   <fsasaki> waiting for people to come

   <DomJones> Scribe: DomJones

   Felix: Discussing presentation to HTML WG, Frederick showed
   example use-case in OKAPI. Large group, many issues, individual
   feedback is more likely from HTML WG.


     [14] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/LyonNov2012#Friday_2nd_Nov:_MLW-LT_WG_meeting_agenda

   Felix: Dave, Dom, Leroy have to leave at 1 which topics do we
   need them for. Morning agenda (until 13.00) is fine, XLIFF
   discussion will be held at 3pm. Implementors slot is from

   … Starting goToMeeting

   Naoto and Tadej join us on the goToMeeting.


     [15] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/LyonNov2012#Friday_2nd_Nov:_MLW-LT_WG_meeting_agenda

   … We just had a meeting with HTML group, no specific outcome
   but connection made between the WG. 1st topic is ITS tool

   Dave Lewis: Background to this - came from MT confidence score
   generalised out to other data cats. Solution applies to any
   data cat. Some cat's will contain confidence, quality, disambig
   which may be different for every element / span. Most likely
   that they use one value for tool information. Large overhead
   for replication. Main example was proposal for MT confidence

   … You may have default done with one tool other certain
   sections done with other tool. Global rules therefore cannot be
   used. We need with a seperate data cat or a certain mechanism.
   Suggestion to use trick used for standoff markup, not a data
   category, contains tool information referencing part of that
   tool element aligned to data category.

   … Allows element referencing across a document.

   … Could be over-written by element further on in document.

   Dave Lewis: Yves had proposed some text but in order to take
   furthur we needed to look at its application to other data
   cats. I have looked at the ITS tool text and give examples on
   current proposal for relevent data cats.

   … have done this for MT confidence and Text A Annotation. If we
   use this mechanism as a general purpose mechanism which seems
   to work fairly well.

   … you end up with data cats which only have a local attribute
   (such as MT score) this combined with top level references for
   tool informaiton.

   … looking at definition of text A annotation you end up with
   nearly the exact same pattern.

   … have received comments back from Marcis on MT confidence

   David F: Tools should be made mandatory on more data
   categories. Loc Qual Score (Precis) should be a candidate for
   mandatory application of this. The same for Text A Annotation.

   David Lewis: Have reduced it right down to local selectors, not
   applicable to global.

   Felix: In your presentation you state "not define external
   format" this is not clear in the draft. You just have a URI.

   Dave Lewis: We're probably a bit too generalised when we talk
   of having a score for Text A Annotation.This could have been
   used for Disambig, Terminology, Domain. The way we phrase that
   allows several different data categories where the score is not
   different from the process it relates to.

   … Could have general purpose score attribute.

   … MT confidence score, disambig, domain, Terminology. Would
   this need to be more open ended?

   … feedback from Tadej

   Tadej: One thing which would be good to have is relation of
   each instance to a score of the data category it relates to.
   You can parse up the tree and see which data cats are produced
   by which tool. Same text by terminology tools and Text A tools
   at the same time. So could we direct tool-info at every node?

   Dave Lewis: That is what we were trying to avoid with tool-info
   with a mechanism for global declaration. Which ITS data
   category annotations it applies to.

   <fsasaki> its:toolsRef="MTConfidence|file:///tools.xml#T1

   … For the element you are applying the declaration to you are
   saying all of the data categories in that element were
   generated by a specific tool. Different disambig / tools need
   to be applied element by element. Worst case scenerio is every
   element being done by a different tool but we dont think this
   is a common situation.

   Felix: The example pasted above, is this what you mean?

   <fsasaki> also, tadej, is that the functionality you need?

   Dave Lewis: Yes, gives flexibility for possible declaration of
   every markup. I was interested to hear the feedback from others
   as to whether we need different annotations for text
   annotations, domain and terminology.

   Marcis: If you dont look-up all instances in a term base, but
   use extraction method for term-candidates you have the
   confidence. Further you can fine-tune processes based on the

   … allows users to decide precision and recall which allows fine
   tuning of systems.

   <tadej> fsasaki: this is expressive enough, but may be verbose
   for content which was annotated for multiple data categories -
   it boils down how easy it is to relate every its-ta-confidence
   instance to the tool it was produced by, where there are many
   tools in the mix

   Dave Lewis: Had been starting to think about this for demo
   systems. Enricher run over text inserts alot of annotation
   which may well result in false+

   … How much do we know about the processes applied to

   … thresholds need to be added.

   tadej: One solution to avoid verbosity is annotation of the
   tool at the top-level of the document. Produce one annotation
   on the root applied to all elements below.

   Dave Lewis: ITS tool essential does that but data category is
   bound to particular tool. Mark-up addresses that, we're taking
   that a step forward to text analysis annotation. Is this "at

   Felix: No, "at risks" means that feature is clearly defined. To
   do that we have only three weeks left.

   Dave Lewis: If we happy with how we operate ITS-tools we need
   to look at how we insert these data cats for Text A Confidence
   score and for MT confidence. 1-2-1 matching to data categories.
   For complicated like disambig are there more than one
   confidence score depending on entity, lexical mapping, etc. Do
   we need to be more fine grained in the confidence score there?

   … There is the overview, questions on wording etc, my feelings
   are that it seems to work on those data categories and the
   knock on effect of combining confidence scores into one data

   … Im looking for people interested to give us feedback now. Im
   happy to continue to editing these but looking for feedback
   from Marcis, Tadej, David F, Ankit.

   Felix: 3 weeks is tight. Lots of test suite work needed in this
   period. Suggest all those interested in this to look into this
   today (2nd Nov). We will discuss again on Monday and try to fix
   it completely so the other timeline is not effected. If
   something comes up on Monday we have another week but we need
   feedback by Monday on this.

   <fsasaki> tadej, it seems we lost you on gotomeeting

   Dave Lewis: Suggestion has a few typos etc, can people look at
   that. Example annotation provided, some what editorial but we
   have some examples as to how it works with different data

   <tadej> fsasaki: reconnecting - the audio suddenly went silent.

   felix: This has an impact on test-cases, needs to be in the
   test suite.

   <fsasaki> tadej, would that be a mandatory for text analytics?
   asking also because of test suite etc.

   David L: We have it as a general mechanism would not make sense
   with a number of other categories.

   David F: Unless I know the value / profile of the score it
   provides nothing.

   Felix: Are there tools which produce this score out of human

   … where scores are provided based on reviewing but a human.

   <tadej> fsasaki: what exactly are you referring to as
   mandatory? the confidence score mechanism, or the tool
   reference mechanism?

   David F: Score is an orthogonal feature.

   felix: For MT we have MT-confidence, what other data categories
   tool would produce that?

   <fsasaki> tadej, I meant whether the tool mechanism should be
   mandataory for implementors of text analysis annotation

   Pedro: Any LSP would produce score for themselves. In scenerios
   client request quality audit on content we produce or by 3rd
   party. Important point - before quality audit you set the
   methodology otherwise the audit is not valid at all.

   <fsasaki> that is, for implementors of a score for text

   Pedro: different LSPs have different metrics based on revision,
   type of errors, severity and generates a score.

   David F: Without a methodology you cannot produce score. May be
   better to call is "quality calculation score" etc.

   Felix: Precis is currently at risk without this methodology.

   Tadej: Should this be mandatory? I think that without knowing
   what produced the output it is hard to say anything about the
   score. Which scores are comparable is hard to identify.

   Dave L: We were talking about having a url that points to the
   info, its a url of an element within that process info element.
   The q: we refer to this process info element without stating
   what the schema is but we state what the element is. Difference
   is having a url that points to anything vs. not defining the
   schema. In XML its fine can point to external or internal
   element. But in HTML we need to specify how the url references
   a url in that script.

   Felix: You could have a seperate script element for each
   standoff item.

   … pitty Yves cannot be on the phone. He has raised concerns:
   anything possible, tool with element it in, or define a schema.
   There is a drawback that you restrict people to xml processing,
   what about the case of RDF or audio. Does everyone who needs
   the element need XML?

   Pedro: This can be used by a client where a ref is used Score
   is normally a relative value. You say if the threshold is X and
   whether the content can be part of the profile ref.

   Dave L: SMT gives the case where you are indexing the training
   data to diff MT engines. No way to classify that we understand
   at the moment. You may end up defining a MT by a description of
   the MT egine.

   Pedro: Not many impls as its hard to get that score

   Dave L: Self-generating score only used for comparison between
   the same engines.

   <fsasaki> "Disambiguation|file:///tools.xml#T2" >

     [16] http://enrycher.com/v1.2/language-en

   Felix: Paste proposal into chat, from Yves, this URI itself is
   just a URI, no further information, self-contained in the URL.
   This tool is X, in Lang Y, in the URL where each tool can
   create the tool itself. But in a large document this is the
   list of annotation with URI = tool1, URI = tool2. Dont restrict
   the URI being retrieved and XML removes this restriction.

   Dave Lewis: Naoto has interest in this.

   … any other comments else I'll take this on board, update text,
   get feedback from Tadej and Yves. Try to update and send off
   today (2nd Nov).

   Tadej: I like felix's suggestion on URI encoding. All people
   will not be able to encode in a common format but good to
   provide best-practices. I will send Dave L some comments.

   … raise another point: In Dave's proposal mechanism for Text A
   Annotation can only be applied to ITS data cats and not non-ITS
   data cats. Is this something we would like to open up?

   Dave L: Not sure on that wording, really a scoping thing. Could
   be applied to meta-tags in HTML but this stretches scope of
   Impl. Suggest we delete that. Unless others have a specific

   Tadej: When not used on ITS elements meaning is undefined.

   Dave L: Can you email me that and I'll add it to the document.

   David F: 2mins. I need to fix logistics for XLIFF meeting. Does
   everyone want to use it or is it a breakout?

   Felix. Timing it needs to be 3pm.

   … 3-4pm xliff mapping meeting

   … may make sense to have everyone here to review action items.
   Move this to 4pm.

   … updated agenda

     [17] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/LyonNov2012

   … Tadej / Noato will you join us this afternoon?

   … Tadej no.

   Felix: Propose we adjourn at 3pm and the XLIFF meeting can

meeting with i18n wg

   <fsasaki> self-introduction of participants


     [18] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-core/2012OctDec/0022.html


     [19] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-core/2012OctDec/0022.html

   Felix: HTML session introduced MLW-LT group. Would be good to
   get feedback on a number of issues. Info share meeting with
   L10n w3c group. 2 items are relevant for you. Directionality
   and ruby information.

   … values are given for directionality and ruby information.

   … what is here is from the ITS 1.0 spec without changing

   … Times have changed for directionality there are new
   attributes, Ruby has a different ruby model than XHTML. So how
   do we proceed?

   … We are aiming to make people aware of what is possible for
   directionality and ruby. Would be great to get your feedback.
   We refer to what is being done for these 2 data cat in HTML5.

   … For those using XML based examples the best thing would be
   for them to use the HTML namespace. However if not possible
   these elements could be defined in the ITS namespace.

   … 1 other question: There is no rendering or processing here
   involved which is hard for testing relating activities. Should
   we just refer to these other places, would be good to get your

   r12a: Do we need to maintain backwards compat with ITS1.0.

   Felix: Its not straightforward, a break may make sense. Not
   sure it would break anything in content or applications. If we
   need to break this backward compatibility we need to discuss
   this in the group.

   ts20/its20.html#directionality-definition (sec 6.5.1)

     [20] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#directionality-definition

   r12a: ITS describes concepts that need to be supported for
   internationalisation. Key thing: Express the concepts that need
   to be supported in the markup. One thing you missed at the
   HTML5 WG on bi-di, which you will not have heard.

   … We started describing how to use HTML5 for bi-di. bdi element
   and "auto" value ??

   … they isolate certain text for dbi where you have text in HTML
   and it interferes with stuff around it. Not only are problems
   with dropping text into HTML but for bdi in general. Direction
   can be assigned to text but can also isolate that text in
   plaintext. People are encouraged to use those control codes as
   opposed to existing methods.

   … The CSS working group has retrofitted those ideas into the
   CSS model. Looking for HTML WG to add two extra values to the
   DIR attribute. Isolation is really important in bdi. Dir = LTR
   / RTL is to be avoided in replacement of new bdi attributes.

   … proposed extension to HTML that would be retrofitted into
   HTML5 during the CR phase (2014). Major shift, all fluid, many
   questions remain.

   Felix: Could we point to the HTML5 spec for directionality.

   r12a: May not yet be in HTML5 by the time ITS2.0 is published.

   Fantasai: Seems you have some values not already in HTML5.
   Given this it makes sense to add values here, not worrying
   about what HTML5 is doing. I dont think its a concern to sync
   this feature with HTML5.

   r12a: May be a problem as ITS 2.0 is looking to inform on how
   bdi is used in HTML5.

   Jirka: I think its no problem as we are providing mapping from
   HTML model to our model. So its not too much of a problem to
   add two new additional values to ITS.

   … we can just extend our mapping from HTML5

   Felix: People involved in XLIFF may have more information. At
   LocWorld support of bi-direct support in XLIFF was discussed.
   We are trying to copy the HTML5 model. That may be one area
   where they may want more than guidance. They are near feature
   freeze, David can you comment?

   David F: Bi-direction support was added to draft. Feature
   freeze informally before christmas / mid-january. Not trying to
   mimic HTML. In XLIFF 1.2 unicode control chars were being used.
   No Auto value in current draft, only LTR, RTL on structured or
   inline elements.

   … With have (in XLIFF) structural and in-line, not global and
   local. They are not overlapping.

   … current draft can be influenced. If this should be changed it
   could. ITS to XLIFF mapping call today.

   … important as its a major release, breaks backwards compat,
   future releases (minor) will not change back-wards.

   … No ness about attributes it would be about processing
   requirements. Very little processing req. If you have input for
   proc req then its the right time to influence the XLIFF group.

   r12a: Likely to change. We have documentation on bdi. Inline
   took line with minimum markup. New docs influence the way
   people write bdi. Every word that changes is surrounded with
   markup. Its a shift from previous approach.

   David F: Even things which would be already considered very
   local in XML are very structured in XLIFF.

   Felix: Should we continue this now or table for 3pm? One aspect
   to what Richard said from the beginning. ITS document provides
   to people the right thing to do, therefore XLIFF people could
   be directed to this.

   r12a: isolate and automatically guess / assign directionality
   are given by bdi. You can start a span of plaintext by LTR or

   David F: Is the auto approach a good idea to have in

   Norbert: There is an overlap between your work and my work.
   There is aneed from ITS to work with Reg Exp with JavaScript.
   Are there other req where you define things that would be
   interpreted in Javascript.


     [21] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#allowedchars-implementation

   norbert: reg exp where ITS defines req exps interpreted by
   Javascript. WE have to improve unicode support in reg exp so
   your functionality would work. Are there other features of ITS
   that need support in Javascript.

   … you may be relying on other features which is not yet

   … if nothing comes to mind right now we are also looking for
   future input.

   Felix: This is the main case where this may be used in
   Javascript. I dont see it so much in other data cats where this
   may be applied.

   <fantasai> RRSAgent: pointer

   Felix: ITS 2.0 moves to LC at end of Nov. I will send this to
   you guys for review as to whether you think this is the right
   way to be phrased. I need to talk to W3C about back-wards
   compat with Directionality and Ruby. ITN group is busy but a
   heads-up another call will be coming in Nov. We'll take it from

   r12a: What does MLW-LT think about bdi and ruby /

   Jirka: Im worried that the HTML spec was changed recently and
   this has not been integrated into the spec yet. How to handle
   more complex cases in Ruby etc. We should use same mark-up on
   ruby as taken by the HTML but do we have time.

   r12a: Ruby supoprt in 5.0 HTML, and isolation support. THe
   problem is that 5.0 wont be finished before your spec if

   Jirka: As long as ruby is stable in HTML 5.0 but I'm not sure
   on this.

   David F: Allowed to use normative references, are they in the
   right state?

   felix: We need to develop our testing and be part of our LC
   draft. This doc provides guidance to do the right thing, rather
   than having a normative definition.

   David F: Data cats from 1.2 have moved from 1.0. If the
   category is now in HTML would the right thing to say its no
   longer in our scope as its in the HTML WG scope.

   Felix: We still need to give guidance, albeit non normative

   Jirka: Currently we try to copy what HTML is doing. What was in
   ITS 1.0 we used XHTML base elements which were dropped. Would
   be strange to add ruby in 2.0 to find it was later added to

   r12a: Brainstorming… In data cat world generic terms can be
   described in prose. What currently being done in HTML5 in terms
   of markup. Enables test in CR based on current HTML5 spec.

   felix: Ruby tests are rendering based. We currently have no
   browser / render based impls which means group cannot provide
   the tests. People who provide normative usage are not in this
   room. We need to agree upon this in the WG. We cannot get from
   this group a normative and testable definition.

   r12a: So this info should be in the spec but non normative.

   felix: Yes, this also gives us more time. For example Nov 2013.

   r12a: What would you say in this non-normative text.

   felix: Currently state nothing but that this will be
   back-filled in final draft. Provide placeholder for text and
   move forward after LC. We could then work together to fill in

   <fsasaki> scribe: fsasaki

   dom: we have the opportunity to write what is happening next
   ... if we provide it non-normatively now

   david: non-normative means that you don't use the words MUST,
   SHOULD etc. and you don't need to do tests

   richard: an application does not need to test things for
   ... you could not guarentee that XLIFF will have "placeholders"
   for bidi stuff

   <DomJones> scribe: DomJones

   felix: Group based on EC funding and therefore time limited.
   time extension are not a possibility which gives us a strict
   timeline on this.

   … any other thoughts from those here?

   Fantasai: Asks for clarification, richard said your providing
   recommendations on how mark-up should be applied to content.

   felix: these recomendations are created based on inputs from
   ITN working group. So others can look at how directionality /
   ruby works.

   … We're looking at how it works in HTML, guidance, not a
   normative feature. Not replicating what is done normatively in
   the HTML spec.

   Fantasai: Looking at how to take HTML standards for
   localisation and applies to other pieces of data. Would not
   suggest using approach taken in HTML. 2 things: XHTML model and
   current HTML model and not sure how it will look in future

   felix: Its a moving target

   Fantasai: Should have one attribute for directionality. Not the
   same as replacing with bits of HTML5.

   felix: placeholder is a good agreement.

   Jirka: Good to represent all values in directionality.

   Felix: Who would test this normative features? Hoping we dont
   define normatively as there are no test cases.

   David F: Normative should be tabled for 2.5 or 2.1 ITS.

   … they are unstable elsewhere so what can we actually do?

   Fantasai: XML dir attribute with clear semantics. Have all RTL,
   LTR, etc, all applied to one attribute. As opposed to multiple
   attributes. Which maps to bdi algorithm using X and Y.

   Felix: We can create such guidance. Is there someone from the
   LTN group who would like to help us with this?

   Fantasai: Aharon Lanin from google would be a good person for

   Felix: And if he is not avliable?

   r12a: Email us and we'll help you with this.

   felix: Normative and non-normative (guidance) are our options.

   r12a: From ITS conception we need to specify what information
   is needed anywhere to support ruby and directionality.
   Direction, isolate, RTL etc. This was applied in a number of
   formats, DocBook etc. What I think Im hearing is we could do
   this generic stuff but to get through CR phase you need to test
   these things. If you cant map this, you can't test.

   Felix: We have three weeks. Whether testable or not. Three
   weeks to stable draft. As soon as its normative deadline is
   three weeks away.

   Jirka: Maybe go too deep into functionality.

   Felix: If it is normative it is not done. You need to assure
   rendering, impl.

   Jirka: Displaying, rendering is a problem for styling.

   Felix: Who here is implementing Directionality and Ruby?
   Currently there are no testing provided for this. If its
   normative you need an assertion that it is tested.

   Jirka: Different case as it was in ITS 1.0, if you drop it you
   miss backward compatability.

   Fantasai: Are you defining technology or a spec for others or
   guidance for others to define technology.

   Felix: Except for Ruby and Directionality technology. Hence
   proposing drop these.
   ... There are features we used to test Ruby and Directionality
   in 1.0 which use XPATH not used in HTML.

   Norbert: Why are we even talking about these if they are not
   being used.

   r12a: Important for spec but not being implemented.
   ... I would strongly support it being non-normative rather than
   not having it there. Issue about stability as opposed to
   whether it is need it or not.

   Felix: Would it work if I re-draft current sections, send them
   to you, with placeholders you can see and whether it makes
   sense for LC draft? Would that be ok? At the actually LC we
   have another opportunity to update.

   <scribe> ACTION: on felix to draft the ruby and directionality
   sections See
   [22]http://www.w3.org/2012/11/02-mlw-lt-irc#T11-14-29 recorded

     [22] http://www.w3.org/2012/11/02-mlw-lt-irc#T11-14-29

   <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find on. You can review and register
   nicknames at

     [24] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/users%3E.

   <scribe> ACTION: on fsasaki to draft the ruby and
   directionality sections See
   [25]http://www.w3.org/2012/11/02-mlw-lt-irc#T11-14-29 recorded

     [25] http://www.w3.org/2012/11/02-mlw-lt-irc#T11-14-29

   <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find on. You can review and register
   nicknames at

     [27] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/users%3E.

   action on felix to draft the ruby and directionality sections
   See [28]http://www.w3.org/2012/11/02-mlw-lt-irc#T11-14-29

     [28] http://www.w3.org/2012/11/02-mlw-lt-irc#T11-14-29

   <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find on. You can review and register
   nicknames at

     [29] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/users%3E.

   <scribe> ACTION: on felix2 to draft the ruby and directionality
   sections See
   [30]http://www.w3.org/2012/11/02-mlw-lt-irc#T11-14-29 recorded

     [30] http://www.w3.org/2012/11/02-mlw-lt-irc#T11-14-29

   <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find on. You can review and register
   nicknames at

     [32] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/users%3E.

   <mhellwig> scribe: mhellwig

   fsasaki reviewing agenda

domain lower casing

   yves: what do we return the lowercase value or the original

   <scribe> ACTION: pablo to talk to Lucy about casing issue
   [recorded in

   <trackbot> Sorry, ambiguous username (more than one match) -

   <trackbot> Try using a different identifier, such as family
   name or username (eg. pnietoca, pbada)

   <scribe> ACTION: paolo to discuss casing issue with Lucy
   Software [recorded in

   <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find paolo. You can review and
   register nicknames at

     [35] http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/users%3E.

   <pnietoca> ACTION: pnietoca to discuss casing issue with Lucy
   Software [recorded in

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-273 - Discuss casing issue with Lucy
   Software [on Pablo Nieto Caride - due 2012-11-09].

   fsasaki: domain pointers can have v. long XPATH expressions.
   Absolute location paths would make it shorter.
jirka: write location path for XPATH. Allow absolute and relative locati
on paths.
fsasaki agrees
jirka: we should rewrite the specification completely.
action: fsasaki to edit specification to resolve location path issue

Marcis' comments (part 1)

      Marcis: to analyse for terms, you have to break down the document
... you need to do the analysis several times, for different domains
... unguided term annotation: annotations are made with confidence score
... a second way is to recognise terms in term base and annotate. there
you don't have confidence. either you have the term in your term or you
... question arises: how do we add tool info?
... and another question for group: what happens when external rules are
 not available?
fsasaki: we have linked global rules. the conformance section we say tha
t systems must process these rules
dave: we haven't defined what happens if it breaks down. we suppose a 'b
est effort basis'
Marcis: translate data category defines what should be analysed. This do
es not exist for other data categories.
... do we need a definition?
dave: there isn't a definition. it hasn't come up. [in case of annotatio
ns] you just do it for the whole document.
... no new mechanism is needed. maybe we need a discussion about this
Marcis: for translation it's more critical. annotation you add, you don'
t replace anything
dave: you could have false positives and then there's cost for going thr
ough and cross these false positives out. it will just raise cost
Marcis: does global override local?
dave: yes
Marcis: terminology is not to be inheritable, but what about this case [
discusses example in his notes]
fsasaki: we are looking at an example with nested elements around which
there is a term annotation around it
... need additional item information for each element.
Marcis: would it be the same in disambig?
fsasaki: yes, disambig is not inherited
fsasaki: [to tadej] would enrycher support nested elements
tadej: it's possible, i don't see why it wouldn't be. we're safe here.
Marcis: but you cannot do it locally?
tadej, fsasaki: yes you can
Marcis: what about overlapping annotations
fsasaki: won't solve
Marcis: also agent and tool information. will not go into detail at this
... there are a lot of very finegrained usages in agent provenance
dave: we now have a standoff mechanism, so does it makes sense to have a
 tool which says provenance type = ???
... which would make the metadata definition easier
... so i tihnk it's a good idea to implement a standoff mechanism
action: dave to write an email to fsasaki who will integrate this into t
he spec
action: fsasaki to integrate dave's email about standoff mechanism for p
rovenance into spec

reconvene with Marcis' comments

   <fsasaki> Marcis: language will fall back to language "english"
   as a fallback

   <fsasaki> .. in MT it is important that you know to which
   language you are translating

   <fsasaki> Ankit: difference between language is not ideal

   <fsasaki> David: not an issue of ITS

   <fsasaki> Marcis: sure, just a comment

   <fsasaki> David: any industry implementation does mapping

   <fsasaki> .. mappings are possible, e.g. to map any English
   into your English

   <fsasaki> Marcis: yes, like reading the 1st two characters

   <fsasaki> David: yes

Planning for 2013

fsasaki: we need to do some event planning
fsasaki shows dates and events listed in excel document
fsasaki: F2F in January, workshop in Rome [March]
pedro: going to Gala.
fsasaki: next up F2F in april. tadej, is that good for you? everybody, p
leaes check your calender
tadej: I checked with hotel, availability end of april and a few times b
eginning of May
... May better to climb ...??
fsasaki: would 7th and 8th of May [$1\47] work?
agreement from group
... great. let's have the F2F meeting then.
... what about locworld. anybody going?
dfilip: we are thinking about FEISGILTT in London as we had good attract
ion and follow-up in Seattle so London should work well.
pedro: will probably go and Lucy Software will also be there (at locworl
... I think we should submit as much as we can. not just be there
dfilip: we may have entry to the main programme through feisgiltt.
pedro: most important that we showcases are already running, we have to
show them
fsasaki: any other events to showcase
pedro: I propose an F2F in Madrid in July
... I'll check if the university is available
fsasaki: any other events you may present
mhellwig: DrupalCon at the end of March
fsasaki: [to dave] can you present at XML prague?
dave: ???
dave: also, world wide web conference. submission deadline soon. 13th-17
th May 2013
ankit: September 2013 I'll go to MT summit user track
dfilip:  LRC conference. Around 20th of september 2013
fsasaki: time to close. anything else? when is the drupalcon
mhellwig: there's two. we'll go to one at least
fsasaki: where should the final event be?
jirka: when is it supposed to be. Oct, Nov, Dec 2013?
fsasaki: yes around there, depending of location availability etc. it's
supposed to be our largest workshow. We have a lot of implementations al
ready, so the critical one will be Rome.

action item and issue review


     [37] http://www.w3.org/2012/11/01-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action03


     [38] https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/actions/open

   <fsasaki> close action-231

   <trackbot> ACTION-231 Create tests for its:param closed

   <fsasaki> close action-255

   <trackbot> ACTION-255 Determine and correct wording for
   ISSUE-34 closed

   <fsasaki> close action-258

   <trackbot> ACTION-258 Ask XLIFF TC what best practice of
   mapping ITS into a namespace in XLIFF closed

   <fsasaki> action-268: see

     [39] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-tests/2012Nov/0000.html

   <trackbot> ACTION-268 Make sure that schedule for test suite
   and schema update discussed at
   [40]http://www.w3.org/2012/11/01-mlw-lt-irc#T11-27-30 is taken
   into account notes added

     [40] http://www.w3.org/2012/11/01-mlw-lt-irc#T11-27-30

   <fsasaki> close action-268

   <trackbot> ACTION-268 Make sure that schedule for test suite
   and schema update discussed at
   [41]http://www.w3.org/2012/11/01-mlw-lt-irc#T11-27-30 is taken
   into account closed

     [41] http://www.w3.org/2012/11/01-mlw-lt-irc#T11-27-30


     [42] http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20121105T15

   <fsasaki> ACTION: felix to send info about call time [recorded

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-274 - Send info about call time [on
   Felix Sasaki - due 2012-11-09].

   <fsasaki> action-270: done via

     [44] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Nov/0009.html

   <trackbot> ACTION-270 Ask phil and des and arle about need and
   implementation committment for localization precis during next
   call notes added

   <fsasaki> close action-270

   <trackbot> ACTION-270 Ask phil and des and arle about need and
   implementation committment for localization precis during next
   call closed

   <fsasaki> action-271: dublicate of action-273

   <trackbot> ACTION-271 Add a step regarding the lowercasing of
   the domain data category notes added

   <fsasaki> close action-271

   <trackbot> ACTION-271 Add a step regarding the lowercasing of
   the domain data category closed

   <fsasaki> close issue-52

   <trackbot> ISSUE-52 Domain in HTML5 closed

   <fsasaki> "[Ed. note: Following schema example has to updated
   once we have final XSD schema for ITS 2.0]" - drop example and

   <fsasaki> "[Ed. note: All selector related definitions has to
   be update to reflect queryLanguage]" - some data category
   definitions refer to XPath expressions; need to generalize that
   to refer to "relative or absolute selector"

   <fsasaki> "[Ed. note: Need to reevaluate above statement
   related to ODF.]" - remove paragraph above the note, that's it

   <fsasaki> "The entity type follows inheritance rules." - delete
   the sentence? came back to Tadej

   <fsasaki> "[Ed. note: Below note is taken from the quality
   issue data category. ..." - can be deleted

   <fsasaki> "[Ed. note: Should locQualityIssues also be defined
   for global rules? It seems not to be specific to local.]" - not
   decided yet

   <fsasaki> yves: having a generic container that is nice

   <fsasaki> ACTION: yves to summarized "one container name"
   proposal again [recorded in

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-275 - Summarized "one container name"
   proposal again [on Yves Savourel - due 2012-11-09].

   <fsasaki> "[Ed. note: Missing the local mtconfidencescore
   attribute.]" - to be done after or during tool definition

XLIFF Mapping Meeting [Issue-55]

   <dF> Scribe: Milan

   <dF> Chair: dF

   Richard and Koji are with us, for bidi and Ruby to discuss

   <Yves_> see also section on bidid in draft of XLIFF 2.0

     [46] https://tools.oasis-open.org/version-control/browse/wsvn/xliff/trunk/xliff-20/xliff-core.pdf

   Most of implementations are in XLIFF 1.2, version 2.0 is
   currently under construction

   Mappings are similar (structurally)

   Let's start with Directionality (then Ruby)

   dF: Inline doesn't feature to cover those
   ... XLIFF proposal for directionality in 2.0

   Yves_: Any inline element (including <mrk>) has attribute for

   <Yves_> See Bidi section here:

     [47] https://tools.oasis-open.org/version-control/browse/wsvn/xliff/trunk/xliff-20/xliff-core.pdf

   dF: Masking vs. <mrk> - explaining difference

   r12a: HTML5 includes bdi attribute provides isolation mechanism
   ... HTML WG to provide a new value (Auto), decided
   directionality based on first strong character


     [48] https://tools.oasis-open.org/version-control/browse/wsvn/xliff/trunk/xliff-20/xliff-core.pdf

   <scribe> ACTION: dF to send XLIFF 2.0 spec to Richard [recorded

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-276 - Send XLIFF 2.0 spec to Richard
   [on David Filip - due 2012-11-09].

   dF: There was never mechanicsm like Ruby in XLIFF
   ... can be provided as a context
   ... fs can help(?)
   ... XLIFF is a transport format, not resolved displaying
   issues. Depends on tools how the content is displayed

   Continuing the XLIFF Maping Table (r12a and Koji left)

   Translation Agent Provenance skipped, not Dave

   Text Analysis Annotation skipped

   Target Pointer drives an extraction, there is nothing to

   Id Value as a resname in 1.2, no equivalent in 2.0

   dF: Yves to propose rename on unit in XLIFF 2.0
   ... it doesn't have any sense to have ID value for inlines
   (remove questionmarks)

   Preserve Space solved at segment level (xml:space) but not for

   dF: could be used in sub-flow

   Localization Quality Issue, hold till call with XLIFF committee
   at Nov 6th

   Localization Quality Précis

   dF: We need a mechanism to reference an Agent
   ... who provided quality check

   MT Confidence

   Allowed Characters

   dF: Do we need it for inline?

   Yves_: Yes, example might be Login name restriction

   Storage Size, issue only in 2.0

   dF: push harder to have <mrk> extensible
   ... We stabilized what was possible

   <scribe> ACTION: dF To color-code cells in Mappings table
   dependent on unstable ITS categories or in XLIFF [recorded in

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-277 - Color-code cells in Mappings
   table dependent on unstable ITS categories or in XLIFF [on
   David Filip - due 2012-11-09].

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: dF To color-code cells in Mappings table
   dependent on unstable ITS categories or in XLIFF [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: dF to send XLIFF 2.0 spec to Richard [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: felix to send info about call time [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: on felix to draft the ruby and directionality
   sections See
   [54]http://www.w3.org/2012/11/02-mlw-lt-irc#T11-14-29 recorded
   [NEW] ACTION: on felix2 to draft the ruby and directionality
   sections See
   [56]http://www.w3.org/2012/11/02-mlw-lt-irc#T11-14-29 recorded
   [NEW] ACTION: on fsasaki to draft the ruby and directionality
   sections See
   [58]http://www.w3.org/2012/11/02-mlw-lt-irc#T11-14-29 recorded
   [NEW] ACTION: pablo to talk to Lucy about casing issue
   [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: paolo to discuss casing issue with Lucy Software
   [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: pnietoca to discuss casing issue with Lucy
   Software [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: yves to summarized "one container name" proposal
   again [recorded in

     [54] http://www.w3.org/2012/11/02-mlw-lt-irc#T11-14-29
     [56] http://www.w3.org/2012/11/02-mlw-lt-irc#T11-14-29
     [58] http://www.w3.org/2012/11/02-mlw-lt-irc#T11-14-29

   [End of minutes]

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [64]scribe.perl version
    1.137 ([65]CVS log)
    $Date: 2012/11/07 16:15:17 $

     [64] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [65] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/

Received on Wednesday, 7 November 2012 17:01:47 UTC