- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 10:37:51 +0100
- To: "public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org" <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <510646EF.20607@w3.org>
Hi all, as it seems I really can't be on the call, apologies. Arle will provide new dial in details later. Please join http//irc.w3.org , channel #mlw-lt, to make sure that you have the latest dial in info. Best, Felix Am 27.01.13 20:58, schrieb Felix Sasaki: > 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 ¦tajner - > 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="Economía"/> > > <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 Monday, 28 January 2013 09:38:47 UTC