- From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 18:07:50 +0000
- To: www International <www-international@w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/2013/02/14-i18n-minutes.html
Text version follows:
Internationalization Working Group Teleconference
14 Feb 2013
[2]Agenda
[2]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2013Feb/0014.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2013/02/14-i18n-irc
Attendees
Present
aphillip, davidClarke(IRC), johnKlensin, matial, r12a,
fsasaki, aharon, johnOConner, kojii, najib(IRC)
Regrets
Norbert, ning
Chair
aphillip
Scribe
fsasaki
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Agenda
2. [6]action items
3. [7]Info Share
4. [8]Isolating Direction in HTML5
5. [9]Ruby Annotation Extension Spec
6. [10]Moving Forward Bidi Change Proposal
7. [11]AOB?
* [12]Summary of Action Items
__________________________________________________________
Agenda
action items
action-165?
<trackbot> ACTION-165 -- Richard Ishida to contact Tab about
plans to make the ruby spec extension -- due 2012-12-12 -- OPEN
<trackbot>
[13]http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/165
[13] http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/165
richard: can be closed
close action-165
<trackbot> Closed ACTION-165 Contact Tab about plans to make
the ruby spec extension.
richard: robin berjon has produced an HTML extension draft
action-166?
<trackbot> ACTION-166 -- Richard Ishida to inform wg when bidi
documents are ready for review -- due 2012-12-12 -- OPEN
<trackbot>
[14]http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/166
[14] http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/166
close action-166
<trackbot> Closed ACTION-166 Inform wg when bidi documents are
ready for review.
richard: ready for review
action-170?
<trackbot> ACTION-170 -- Addison Phillips to coordinate with
richard regarding KLReq -- due 2013-01-16 -- OPEN
<trackbot>
[15]http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/170
[15] http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/170
aphillip: placeholder
action-174?
<trackbot> ACTION-174 -- Addison Phillips to write article
about floating times in HTML -- due 2013-01-30 -- OPEN
<trackbot>
[16]http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/174
[16] http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/174
aphillip: have started this
<aphillip>
[17]http://www.w3.org/International/wiki/FloatingTime
[17] http://www.w3.org/International/wiki/FloatingTime
aphillip: feel free to comment. Have xxx third of the text in
action-175?
<trackbot> ACTION-175 -- Richard Ishida to contact Robin Berjon
about what he's doing wrt ruby extension work -- due 2013-01-30
-- OPEN
<trackbot>
[18]http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/175
[18] http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/175
richard: done
close action-175
<trackbot> Closed ACTION-175 Contact Robin Berjon about what
he's doing wrt ruby extension work.
action-176?
<trackbot> ACTION-176 -- Addison Phillips to ping anne about
encoding spec -- due 2013-02-07 -- OPEN
<trackbot>
[19]http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/176
[19] http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/176
aphillip: will keep open
action-177?
<trackbot> ACTION-177 -- Addison Phillips to establish scribing
rotation -- due 2013-02-07 -- CLOSED
<trackbot>
[20]http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/177
[20] http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/177
action-178?
<trackbot> ACTION-178 -- Norbert Lindenberg to coordinate
proposing text for ITS directionality with richard -- due
2013-02-07 -- CLOSED
<trackbot>
[21]http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/178
[21] http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/178
action-182?
<trackbot> ACTION-182 -- Richard Ishida to send note with
updated text for directionality to MLW-LT -- due 2013-02-14 --
OPEN
<trackbot>
[22]http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/182
[22] http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/182
Done
action-183?
<trackbot> ACTION-183 -- Addison Phillips to write draft of new
charmod-norm -- due 2013-02-14 -- OPEN
<trackbot>
[23]http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/183
[23] http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/183
aphillip: not done yet
Info Share
aphillip: john klensin joined as invited expert, welcome!
johnC: have worked on i18n issues on IETF and ICANN for some
years, IDN and other topics
... felt to participate in this work no an ongoing basis rather
than complaining later
aphillip: great, welcome!
johnC: recently adobe received funding to work on ITS2
... we are attempting to add tags to jack rabbit
aphillip: cool
+1!
very cool, joconner :)
richard: what is jack rabbit?
joconner: an open source repository
... would like to add the ITS tags into the schema for content
richard: this week published program for MLW workshop in rome
... if you want to go register asap. many spaces are taken
already
... have a good program
[24]http://www.multilingualweb.eu/documents/rome-workshop/rome-
program
... Mark Davis is doing the keynote
... have the usual format with many different people in the
room who haven't met before
... other topic - bidi in HTML work:
... some of the things work, thought it is good to put this out
so that people can look at it
... then korean layout requirements doc
... lot of english + format editing
[24]
http://www.multilingualweb.eu/documents/rome-workshop/rome-program
aphillip: next will speak at imug conference
<aphillip>
[25]http://events.imug.org/events/95268092/?eventId=95268092&ac
tion=detail
[25]
http://events.imug.org/events/95268092/?eventId=95268092&action=detail
Ruby Annotation Extension Spec
richard: robin berjon working on HTML5 ruby extension spec
... he was unaware of stuff we are doing, need closer
communication
... robin sent the draft to public i18n cjk list for review
... we need to look into this in the next couple of weeks of
possible
<aphillip> ACTION: addison: remind group to review berjon's
ruby spec extension proposal [recorded in
[26]http://www.w3.org/2013/02/14-i18n-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-184 - Remind group to review berjon's
ruby spec extension proposal [on Addison Phillips - due
2013-02-21].
richard: what is proposed: availibility of an rb tag
... fantasai proposes an rb.rb.rt.rt model for jukugo ruby
support
... that is with multiple bases at the start of the ruby tag,
and multiple rts at the end
... I think that this is not necessary
... fantasai is concered that if you have an inline set in your
ruby
... annotations at the end of the base characters should be
dropped after the ruby tag
... I think that can be done easily done by the browser
re-organizing information
... doing that with markup is a very small tail for waging a
large dog
... now double sided ruby:
... fantasai is against nesting of ruby elements
... she wants to go closer to what the old Ruby Annotation spec
said
... and use an rtc element for the secondary level of
annotation, eg. rb.rb.rt.rt.rtc(rt.rt)
... having done nested stuff I think it's not so difficult and
may be ok given the frequency
... but fantasai's proposal for double-sided using rtc may be
easier - i need to review the details carefully
Moving Forward Bidi Change Proposal
richard: in the past we wanted to get isolated spans used in
inline markup
... and we planned to write an extension spec for HTML5
... with two new attribute values, corresponding to new unicode
control characters
... however, thinking it over, I thought this might not be the
best way forward
... see the email at
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2013Feb/0
010.html
... the best way might be: to create a new attribute
"direction"
... that attribute would have ltr, rtl, auto as values
... and it would produce isolation by default
... you cannot, like in CSS, put in two things and have the 2nd
one taken up
... e.g. two instances of "dir"
... we already have problems confusing rtl and ltr when they
type
... adding lri rli has the potential to increase typos
... people have to take "intelligent decisions" what to choose
... most people have no clue about the importance of isolation
... and continue what they have always done
... there is a downside of using new values
aharon: another downside:
... lri and rli more or less explicitly say "this should be
isloated"
... that is fine for inline markup, but what about a block
element?
... it doesn't makes sense to write <p dir="lri">
... so ltr and rtl would not get completely deprecated really
richard: an alternative would be the "direction" attribute
... with the three values ltr, rtl, auto
<aphillip> <p dir="rtl" direction="ltr"> :-(
richard: it has the advantage to use it alongside dir in the
short term to ensure transition
felix: what guidance would we give people for non-HTML
scenarios?
richard: good question - will come back to that later?
... if we deprecate dir we can move into the direction of
"direction"
aphillip: that would make many pages invalid
richard: correct
... additional advantages of direction attribute: people
continue to use the same values
... they just need to know "direction" rather than "dir"
... and it doesn't rely on CSS available
... the drawback is that it is a pain to use two attributes at
the same time
... one new idea related to this that only occurred to me
today:
... we almost never want to do non-isloated text
... in unicode report that describes lri and rli it says you
can still use the old values
... if we go away from the old values we will loose the ability
to embed
... which may be useful in some circumstances
... we could have a new attribute that produces isolation
... and we could keep dir
... the new attribute could be bdi
... or bd for "base direction"
... aharon already said you can use direction aspect of block
elements
... so we can give clearer guidance
<matial> I don't see the difference between the direction attr
and the bd(i) attribute
<aphillip> <p dir="rtl" embed>
richard: some people have used directionality in a way they
shouldn't
<aphillip> <p dir="ltr" isoloate>
richard: so generally we always want isolation
aharon: yes
... I support Richard's second proposal (to use a new
attribute)
... use of dir for intentional embedding is not theoretical:
... I know people who use dir in a way that does embedding, not
isolation
... changing the semantics of dir is not an option, and taking
it away is not an option either
... it is incorrect to say that block elements are isolated
... what to do about dir name and CSS - that is not an issue
... if you have <span direction="ltr">
... meaning it is isolated
... directionality is ltr, i.e. <span dir="ltr>
... that is the same, since direcitonality influecnes what you
want to do inside the element
... islolation talkes about what is outside the element
<aphillip> <span dir="rtl" isolate>
aharon: dir is then ignored by new browser if they use
direction
aphillip: is auto equivalent to FSI?
aharon: dir=auto is isolating
richard: in implementations currently it isolates but doesn't
do the "auto" part
aphillip: what actions follow from this?
<r12a>
[27]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2013F
eb/0010.html
[27]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2013Feb/0010.html
richard: need to continue discussion, basic proposal is in mail
I sent
... need to decide whether we should choose option two
... and need to think about getting things moving
... and then we need to find something to author extension spec
...
... before we do all that I think
[28]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-international/2013J
anMar/0229.html
[28]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-international/2013JanMar/0229.html
felix: should we look into this proposal?
richard: that proposal just said that there are two types of
direction
... there is a note about isolation, and I think the proposal
is still valid
... the point is then you define the attribute values
aphillip: we were pointing to HTML4
richard: rlo and lro also don't exist in HTML5, but as concepts
they do
... like to hear opinions
aphillip: need to look into more material before making
decisions
matial: we cannot change dir behavior because we don't want to
break existing pages
... we cannot unify one attribute because often documents are
composed from various pieces
... telling to use two different attributes for direction, one
for blocks and one for inline, will be hard to educate people
... creating a new attributeis the best thing
... if we want a name different from direction it could be
called "bdir"
<aphillip> richard: enjoin folks to read email and send
comments
richard: publish blog post?
... could publish on i18n home page
<Najib-ma> I favors option 2 [create a new attribute]
<Najib-ma> Thinks it is reasonable.
<Najib-ma> But I fear people think of "direction" attribute as
a new name of "dir" attribute.
<Najib-ma> and then will be surprised by the effect of isolate,
if any.
<Najib-ma> That's all
<scribe> ACTION: richard: publish blog post as wiki, put on
front door, and announce to winter list [recorded in
[29]http://www.w3.org/2013/02/14-i18n-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-185 - Publish blog post as wiki, put
on front door, and announce to winter list [on Richard Ishida -
due 2013-02-21].
richard: one more question for aharon
... people have used dir embedding wrongly
... but are there other cases where you want to embed rather
than isolate on purpose?
aharon: no, because then you get with LRM,etc.
richard: if you unnecessarily/accidentally put dir on span in
same direction, no problem?
aharon: other way around
john: classic problem with domain names
AOB?
aharon: in LTR context, span with LTR starting with RTL
character
<matial> Be
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: addison: remind group to review berjon's ruby
spec extension proposal [recorded in
[30]http://www.w3.org/2013/02/14-i18n-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: richard: publish blog post as wiki, put on front
door, and announce to winter list [recorded in
[31]http://www.w3.org/2013/02/14-i18n-minutes.html#action02]
[End of minutes]
--
Richard Ishida
W3C
http://rishida.net/
Received on Thursday, 14 February 2013 18:08:18 UTC