- From: Fuqiao Xue <xfq@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2024 16:31:08 +0800
- To: www-international@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/2024/02/29-i18n-minutes.html
text version:
– DRAFT –
Internationalization Working Group Teleconference
29 February 2024
[2]Agenda. [3]IRC log.
[2]
https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/6d544156-352c-46f2-b6ec-383b4e2462fb/20240229T150000/
[3] https://www.w3.org/2024/02/29-i18n-irc
Attendees
Present
Addison, Atsushi, Bert, Fuqiao, JcK, Richard
Regrets
-
Chair
Addison Phillips
Scribe
Bert
Contents
1. [4]Agenda Review
2. [5]Action Items
3. [6]Info Share
4. [7]RADAR Review
5. [8]Pending Issue Review
6. [9]String-Meta
7. [10]Editors/authors acknowledgements
8. [11]WHATWG + I18N call review
9. [12]AOB?
10. [13]Summary of action items
Meeting minutes
Agenda Review
addison: Anything to add to the agenda?
Action Items
<gb> Found actions in w3c/i18n-actions: #75, #74, #72, #68,
#66, #53, #43, #35, #33, #18, #16, #12, #11, #8, #7, #4
<addison> #75
<gb> [14]Action 75 work on developing new specdev material
about IDNs/domain names/etc. (on xfq) due 2024-02-29
[14] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/75
<addison> #72
<gb> [15]Action 72 update specdev to match string-meta with
string/block direction as appropriate (on aphillips) due
2024-02-22
[15] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/72
<addison> #66
<gb> [16]Action 66 fix base direction vs. paragraph direction
in string-meta (on aphillips) due 2024-01-18
[16] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/66
addison: edits done, topic for today
<addison> #43
<gb> [17]Action 43 pull together the list of win/mac/etc apis
for setting base direction and/or language (on aphillips) due
2023-09-18
[17] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/43
<addison> #35
<gb> [18]Action 35 make the edits of CSS #5478 (on fantasai)
due 2023-08-30
[18] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/35
<addison> #33
<gb> [19]Action 33 Close issues marked `close?` or bring to WG
for further review (on aphillips)
[19] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/33
<addison> #18
addison: closed a couple, down to 22 open
<gb> [20]Action 18 Have informal explanation sessions about
counter style translations with csswg members (on frivoal,
fantasai) due 18 Jul 2023
[20] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/18
<addison> #12
<gb> [21]Action 12 Upgrade/edit the explainer to address issues
raised by google (on aphillips) due 18 Jul 2023
[21] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/12
<addison> #8
<gb> [22]Action 8 Follow up on the status of Canvas and
formatted text (on aphillips) due 18 Jul 2023
[22] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/8
<addison> #7
<gb> [23]Action 7 Remind shepherds to tend to their awaiting
comment resolutions (Evergreen) (on aphillips, xfq, himorin,
r12a, bert-github) due 18 Jul 2023
[23] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/7
<addison> #4
<gb> [24]Action 4 Work with respec and bikeshed to provide the
character markup template as easy-to-use markup (on r12a) due
27 Jul 2023
[24] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/4
Info Share
addison: My long-standing message format thing got accepted by
Unicode. May now have time for other things. :-)
RADAR Review
<addison> [25]https://github.com/w3c/i18n-request/projects/1
[25] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-request/projects/1
addison: Objection to moving webnn to complete?
… OK, will move it. And will send them a note
… I'll aske for more time to review ARIA. Anybody can help to
review?
Pending Issue Review
<addison> [26]https://github.com/w3c/i18n-activity/
issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Apending
[26]
https://github.com/w3c/i18n-activity/issues?q=is:issue+is:open+label:pending
String-Meta
<addison> [27]w3c/string-meta#84
[27] https://github.com/w3c/string-meta/pull/84
<gb> [28]Pull Request 84 Implement the terms 'string direction'
and 'block direction' in place of 'paragrah direction' (by
aphillips)
[28] https://github.com/w3c/string-meta/pull/84
<addison> [29]https://
deploy-preview-84--string-meta.netlify.app/
[29] https://deploy-preview-84--string-meta.netlify.app/
addison: replacing "paragraph direction" term.
… Thanks, r12a, for comments.
xfq: Haven't had time ot review the updated version yet.
JcK: Same
addison: Do you want to review it still?
JcK: I'm happy to accept it
xfq: Same, we can always come back to it later.
addison: OK, merged just now and I will publish it
… Look out for term clashes with CSS.
<addison> [30]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/
public-i18n-core/2024JanMar/0064.html
[30]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-core/2024JanMar/0064.html
<xfq> there's a 'block flow direction' in CSS: [31]https://
drafts.csswg.org/css-writing-modes-4/#block-flow-direction
[31]
https://drafts.csswg.org/css-writing-modes-4/#block-flow-direction
addison: 2nd thing in string meta:
… direction usually needed.
r12a: I thought this was not targeted at content author.
<addison> [32]w3c/vc-data-model#1424 (comment)
[32]
https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/1424#issuecomment-1962999923
r12a: I thought q was if you needed diretcion specified for
every item.
<gb> [33]Issue 1424 Unnecessary direction attribute? (by
iherman) [editorial] [CR2]
[33] https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues/1424
r12a: Nothing to do with the HTML.
addison: I meant by authoring guidelines, when do I need to
include @direction, say in JSON.
… It is more content guidelines than authoring guidelines.
… And about examples in specs, which have bidi
… Do we require them to have @direction?
r12a: So what about my proposed comment?
addison: I don't disagree with it. The challenge is if people
can determine if first-strong will work.
… So I'd say you should include direction unless you know
better,
… rather than inlcude direction only if needed.
r12a: In theroy, if you got a default for the whole set, you
should not need the direction for individual items.
… If you don't have a default, and the spec requires
strong-first, then if you ar enot sure about the first
character, you need direction.
… and for the rest you can include it to be safe.
addison: Do we develiop this guidance in string-meta?
r12a: I thought it already said this.
… But would't hurt to have a section for people who are
creating sets of strings.
addison: We mostly have text about what specs should do, or
implementers, but not a lot for producers.
xfq: Agree that guidelines for producers would be useful. At
least highlighted for this audience.
ACTION: addison: propose best practices for producers and for
examples in specs in string-meta
<gb> Created [34]action #76
[34] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/76
r12a: Would have to say "guidelines for people creating sets of
strings".
addison: Machines could be producers, too.
r12a: But the guidelines are for humans.
addison: I'll propose some text.
r12a: Use this comment. Can I sent it?
addison: Yes, please.
Editors/authors acknowledgements
<addison> [35]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/
public-i18n-core/2024JanMar/0063.html
[35]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-core/2024JanMar/0063.html
addison: ^^ florian's response, includes r12a's mail.
<addison> Richard's email: [36]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/
Public/public-i18n-core/2024JanMar/0060.html
[36]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-core/2024JanMar/0060.html
r12a: We have new publication rules that mean you cannot inlude
long lists of contributors, only active editors.
… Editor may be just somebody who accepts pull requests and
edits, and maybe contributes text himself.
… So how do you recognize the other people who contributed most
of the content?
… Call them "author"?
… But somebody who reviewed a doc and made suggestions, is that
an author?
… And if that somebody reviewd and contributed to just one
section?
… An author could be many things. From a list of names you
don't know what they did.
… Unicode has an Acknowledgements section, which explains what
people did.
… That section is at the bottom and probably many people never
read it.
… So I'm discussing that with the editorial committee and
asking if it can be moved to the very top.
<r12a> [37]https://www.w3.org/International/sealreq/khmer/
indexnew.html
[37] https://www.w3.org/International/sealreq/khmer/indexnew.html
r12a: ^^ example with acks before the introduction section.
… Given that we have to be conservative in naming editors, what
is the best way to recognize those other people?
addison: I have seen docs with lengthy lists of editors.
r12a: We cannot do that anymore, the editors now need to be
active in the WG.
addison: And authors?
r12a: They are not restricted, but a simple list doesn't
explain what they did.
addison: In Message Formats I'm listed as editor, and I'd like
to recognize a few people, and then there are many more people
that contributed.
… I don't want to lose people because they are not the
committer of an edit.
… The document should honor the contributors.
<r12a> [38]https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr14/
tr14-51.html#Acknowledgments
[38]
https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr14/tr14-51.html#Acknowledgments
r12a: It is not as easy as it sounds. We have called all
contributors "authors" for that reason in the past.
… ^^ here is an example ack section used by Unicode.
… We should make a proposal.
… Initially just for us, but eventually for all of W3C.
… Will lead to changes in ReSpec.
… If we can use i18n docs as examples to see how it works, that
would be useful.
<r12a> [39]https://w3c.github.io/clreq/
[39] https://w3c.github.io/clreq/
xfq: I think I'd like a short editors list and a prominent ack
list, maybe with a link to it from the meta data in the head.
<r12a> [40]https://w3c.github.io/alreq/
[40] https://w3c.github.io/alreq/
xfq: Move the ack section up and make it more prominent,
including with a link to it
<xfq> HTML: [41]https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/
acknowledgements.html#acknowledgments
[41]
https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/acknowledgements.html#acknowledgments
addison: Do I need to comment on the thread?
… It should be in the list of the group that that spec design.
<xfq> w3c/specberus, w3c/tr-design, w3c/respec, and/or
tobie/specref maybe
<xfq> also the spec-prod@ list
addison: We can try it for a while.
bert: My experience is that it is not actually easy to write a
good ack section, but I agree it is a good thing to have.
r12a: But at least get the major contributors, even if you
forget some of the smaller ones over time.
… and you can findon GitHub all the people that did pull
requests.
addison: Let's see for a bit how it works.
WHATWG + I18N call review
<addison> [42]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/
member-i18n-core/2024Feb/0006.html
[42]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2024Feb/0006.html
<addison> [43]whatwg/html#5799
[43] https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/5799
<gb> [44]Pull Request 5799 Fix #4562: add support for
internationalized email addresses (by aphillips)
[addition/proposal] [needs implementer interest] [topic: forms]
[i18n-tracker]
[44] https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/5799
addison: "host string" vs "domain string" in HTML. But I think
there will be no additional validation rules.
r12a: BAsically, as long as there is an "@" in the middle.
… I'll try to rebase the github pull request and address the
comment.
<r12a> [45]w3c/i18n-actions#73 (comment)
[45]
https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/73#issuecomment-1954028449
<gb> [46]CLOSED Action 73 make a list of invisible characters
to support html 5121 discussion (on r12a) due 2024-02-22
[46] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/73
<addison> #73
<gb> [47]CLOSED Action 73 make a list of invisible characters
to support html 5121 discussion (on r12a) due 2024-02-22
[47] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/73
r12a: I'm assuming I now need to open issue in WhatWG with our
recommendation to revisit this and create named entitiies for
this list, with the compiled info in that issue.
addison: There are other open an issue.
r12a: But they don't address the whole thing.
ACTION: richard: create an issue against html requesting the
list of named entities based on work in #73
<gb> Created [48]action #77
[48] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/77
<r12a> #77 note: [49]w3c/i18n-actions#73 (comment)
[49]
https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/73#issuecomment-1954028449
<gb> [50]Action 77 create an issue against html requesting the
list of named entities based on work in #73 (on r12a) due
2024-03-07
[50] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/77
<r12a> note #77: [51]w3c/i18n-actions#73 (comment)
[51]
https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/73#issuecomment-1954028449
<gb> Added [52]comment
[52]
https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/77#issuecomment-1971443459
<gb> [53]Issue 1815 Discuss i18n-glossary and Infra
harmonization (by aphillips) [pending] [Agenda+I18N+WHATWG]
[s:infra] [whatwg]
[53] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-activity/issues/1815
ACTION: addison: compare infra to i18n-glossary export list and
report back
<gb> Created [54]action #78
[54] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/78
addison: I'll make a list and we'll see how we compare.
ACTION: addison: schedule a follow-up call with WHATNOT in
~April
<gb> Created [55]action #79
[55] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/79
AOB?
Summary of action items
1. [56]addison: propose best practices for producers and for
examples in specs in string-meta
2. [57]richard: create an issue against html requesting the
list of named entities based on work in #73
3. [58]addison: compare infra to i18n-glossary export list and
report back
4. [59]addison: schedule a follow-up call with WHATNOT in
~April
Received on Friday, 1 March 2024 08:31:10 UTC