- From: Pierre-Anthony Lemieux <pal@sandflow.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2016 23:22:08 -0800
- To: Shervin Afshar <safshar@netflix.com>
- Cc: Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org>, Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>, Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>, Mark Davis <mark@macchiato.com>, Steven R Loomis <srloomis@us.ibm.com>, "public-tt@w3.org" <public-tt@w3.org>
Hi Shervin, Thanks for the update, and to the CLDR TC for considering the input. > In some other cases it's not very clear if the inclusion of a specific characters is justified or simply due to > bad data (e.g. u+017F, LATIN SMALL LETTER LONG S which is included in the set latnExtA provided in [2]). I believe that the recommended sets erred on the side of caution, and were created to deliberately cast a wider, rather than narrower, net whenever possible. For instance, the recommended set for each of the "lv,lt,et,hr,cs,pl,sl,sk,tr" locales includes all of the Latin Extended-A block, instead of attempting to optimize each sets at the risk of missing important characters -- the general assumption being that the incremental complexity of supporting all versus parts of the Latin Extended-A block would be marginal, e.g. implementations support all or none of the Latin Extended-A block. > I will update the thread and the ticket with the next steps when I get to check for anomalies of that sort. Looking forward to your feedback. Best, -- Pierre On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Shervin Afshar <safshar@netflix.com> wrote: > Thanks for the new comparison report[1]. CLDR TC discussed this again last > week and looking at the report, it seems that in some cases the issue can be > addressed by adding characters to one of CLDR exemplar categories for the > respective locale; e.g. for Arabic, U+060D (Arabic date separator) or for > Hebrew, U+05C3 (Sof Pasuq). In some other cases it's not very clear if the > inclusion of a specific characters is justified or simply due to bad data > (e.g. u+017F, LATIN SMALL LETTER LONG S which is included in the set > latnExtA provided in [2]). > > Therefore, a closer inspection of each set seems necessary. I will update > the thread and the ticket with the next steps when I get to check for > anomalies of that sort. > > [1]: http://www.sandflow.com/public/CLDR-report-20161204.txt > [2]: > https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ttml/raw-file/bc0f3b1a9104/ttml-ww-profiles/cldr-supplemental-data/cldr-sub-cap-supplemental-data.xml > > Best regards, > Shervin > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 1:14 AM, Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org> wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> The TTWG provided feedback on the >> CLDR ticket #8915 <http://unicode.org/cldr/trac/ticket/8915> >> >> Looking forward to your review, >> >> Best regards, >> Thierry Michel >> >> >> Le 05/12/2016 à 01:41, Shervin Afshar a écrit : >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> CLDR ticket #8915 <http://unicode.org/cldr/trac/ticket/8915> was >>> discussed in last technical committee meeting. We think that this >>> use-case falls within the scope of CLDR project, but to effectively add >>> this data to benefit implementers and users, there are few issues which >>> need to be addressed. Most of these questions are reflected in the >>> comment that Mark provided on the ticket (direct link >>> <http://unicode.org/cldr/trac/ticket/8915#comment:8>). To summarize, the >>> following items should be addressed and discussed: >>> >>> – Clarification on the intended usage of this data with regards to >>> section 7.2 and Appendix B of TTML-IMSC1; e.g. inclusion/exclusion >>> rationale, rationale for selection of "base" set; >>> – Comparison between sets in proposed draft data >>> >>> <https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ttml/raw-file/bc0f3b1a9104/ttml-ww-profiles/cldr-supplemental-data/cldr-sub-cap-supplemental-data.xml> >>> and >>> existing CLDR exemplar types (main, aux, punctuation) in various locales; >>> – Plans for providing data for other locales. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Shervin >>> >>> ----- Original message ----- >>> From: r12a <ishida@w3.org <mailto:ishida@w3.org>> >>> To: Mark Davis <mark@macchiato.com >>> <mailto:mark@macchiato.com>>, Shervin Afshar >>> <shervinafshar@gmail.com <mailto:shervinafshar@gmail.com>>, >>> Steven R Loomis/Cupertino/IBM@IBMUS >>> Cc: Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org <mailto:tmichel@w3.org>>, W3C >>> Public TTWG <public-tt@w3.org <mailto:public-tt@w3.org>> >>> Subject: Re: liaison for a Unicode ticket >>> Date: Tue, Nov 8, 2016 3:43 AM >>> >>> hi Mark, Shervin, Steve, >>> >>> It has been thirteen months since there was movement on this >>> query. >>> Could one of you please contact Thierry and advise him on >>> how/whether >>> it's possible to move forward the request of the Timed Text WG? >>> >>> thanks, >>> ri >>> >>> >>> >>> On 03/11/2016 17:38, Thierry MICHEL wrote: >>> > Richard, >>> > >>> > >>> > The TTWG as a Unicode ticket for adding the following "CLDR >>> supplemental >>> > data for subtitle and caption characters" >>> > >>> > The Unicode ticket is available at >>> > http://unicode.org/cldr/trac/ticket/8915 >>> <http://unicode.org/cldr/trac/ticket/8915> >>> > >>> > There has been no further notes on this for 7 months since >>> > IMSC1 has been published as a Recommendation >>> > (https://www.w3.org/TR/ttml-imsc1/ >>> <https://www.w3.org/TR/ttml-imsc1/>) >>> > >>> > >>> > Could you please help the TTWG to lease with Unicode to allow >>> moving >>> > forward ? >>> > >>> > I guess Mark Davis is the liaison contact for Unicode. >>> > >>> > Thierry. >>> > >>> >>> >
Received on Thursday, 22 December 2016 07:22:56 UTC