- From: Fuqiao Xue <xfq@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2025 10:32:56 +0800
- To: www-international@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/2025/03/20-i18n-minutes.html text version: – DRAFT – Internationalization Working Group Teleconference 20 March 2025 [2]Agenda. [3]IRC log. [2] https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/b7edae68-f52c-4aab-a1a6-3c37459e0786/20250320T150000/ [3] https://www.w3.org/2025/03/20-i18n-irc Attendees Present addison, Bert, Fuqiao, Nat McCully, Richard Regrets - Chair Addison Phillips Scribe Bert, xfq Contents 1. [4]Agenda Review 2. [5]Action Items 3. [6]Info Share 4. [7]Review Radar 5. [8]Pending Issues 6. [9]Logical values for the touch-action property 7. [10]Specdev Pull Requests 8. [11]AOB? 9. [12]Summary of action items Meeting minutes <addison> Nat: wondering about the state of Korean Layout Requirements <addison> Richard: it would be great if we could get some Korean folks and yourself involved in the KLReq work <addison> Nat: think @@1 is? <addison> Richard: barrier to entry is low. if you want to contribute... <addison> Nat: still own JLreq a ton of writing <addison> ... will let you know what we find out <addison> Richard: original KLReq written by Korean people <addison> Nat: want the Web to have benefit of some of this research <addison> ... transition away fron Japanese convention <addison> ... started studying elsewhere than Japan, being born is a new native Korean aesthetic <addison> Nat: very interested in formulating way to harmonize across scripts <addison> ... baseline consistency, chaos because have to have heuristics for fonts <addison> ... such as CJK and elevating the em box Agenda Review Action Items <addison> [13]https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues [13] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues <addison> #162 <gb> [14]Action 162 poll I18N/CSS for new day/time (on aphillips) due 2025-03-25 [14] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/162 <addison> #160 <gb> [15]Action 160 review graphemes in specdev and add balinese example and otherwise fix the text (on aphillips) due 2025-03-06 [15] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/160 addison: No CSS people at the last meeting addison: Undertaken a large rewrite, see agenda <addison> close #160 <gb> Closed [16]issue #160 [16] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/160 <addison> #159 <gb> [17]Action 159 write up proposal for specdev char-string section, adding material that deals with the encoding interface et al (on aphillips) due 2025-02-27 [17] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/159 <addison> #157 <gb> [18]Action 157 write glossary proposal identifying options and next steps for those options (on aphillips) due 2025-02-20 [18] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/157 <addison> #135 <gb> [19]Action 135 follow up on XR issue 1393 about locale in session (on aphillips) due 2024-10-17 [19] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/135 <addison> #127 <gb> [20]Action 127 make a list of shared topics of interest between TG2 and W3C-I18N (on aphillips) due 2024-09-30 [20] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/127 <addison> #89 <gb> [21]Action 89 update i18n specs to support dark mode (on xfq) due 2024-04-18 [21] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/89 <addison> #33 <gb> [22]Action 33 Close issues marked `close?` or bring to WG for further review (on aphillips) [22] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/33 <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: I moved 1 of the IETF docs <addison> #4 <gb> [24]Action 4 Work with respec and bikeshed to provide the character markup template as easy-to-use markup (on aphillips) due 27 Jul 2023 [24] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/4 Info Share Review Radar <addison> [25]https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/91/views/1 [25] https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/91/views/1 addison: New incoming request. Web Neural Networks. We reviewed this twice before. xfq: I can take it. Pending Issues <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 xfq: Emphasis marks [27]w3c/i18n-activity#1995 is a minor issue [27] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-activity/issues/1995 <gb> [28]Issue 1995 Emphasis marks do not skip tilde (by w3cbot) [pending] [tracker] [s:css-text-decor] [spec-type-issue] [clreq] [28] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-activity/issues/1995 xfq: tilde is used as punctuation. r12a: I added i:emphasis label on the issue Logical values for the touch-action property <addison> [29]w3c/pointerevents#505 [29] https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/505 <gb> [30]Issue 505 ‘Logical’ values for the ‘touch-action’ property (by aphillips) [i18n-needs-resolution] [future] [30] https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/505 addison: We suggested in June that they might have logical directions, not just physical directions. xfq: WG wants to add logical values in the next version and don't want to delay this version. addison: Sometimes it makes sense to have physical directions and mirroring doesn't apply. But we should do the right thing here. And questiom is if we eant to hold them up, as they have no implementation if this. xfq: It seems they do want to add it. Bert: this is for scrolling … they have zooming too addison: Is this critical for bidi users? nat: JLReq points out that there is often mixed directions. … Not familiar enough with the use cases. But want vertical text to work well for users. xfq: We don't remove the physical diretcions, authors can still use those. addison: Do Arabic speakers have to change their style sheets, when a logical direction would have given them the direction already. … And is this important enough to block them from shipping their spec? ACTION: xfq: ask bidi related groups about pointerevents 505 <gb> Created [31]action #163 [31] https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/163 xfq: Maybe we can ask Arabic and Hebrew users in our groups for their opinion. Specdev Pull Requests <addison> [32]w3c/bp-i18n-specdev#155 [32] https://github.com/w3c/bp-i18n-specdev/pull/155 <gb> [33]Pull Request 155 Rework of the 'character' section (by aphillips) [33] https://github.com/w3c/bp-i18n-specdev/pull/155 <addison> [34]w3c/bp-i18n-specdev#154 [34] https://github.com/w3c/bp-i18n-specdev/pull/154 <gb> [35]Pull Request 154 Update the char truncation section (by aphillips) [35] https://github.com/w3c/bp-i18n-specdev/pull/154 addison: There are two pull requests. … Last week we merged the bigger rewrite of the character section. <addison> [36]https:// deploy-preview-154--bp-i18n-specdev.netlify.app/#char_truncatio n [36] https://deploy-preview-154--bp-i18n-specdev.netlify.app/#char_truncation addison: Lets' start with section 1.54 … I rewrote example 16 … Breaking at graphme cluster and breaking at bytes. … And limits on byte length when character need more bytes. … Richard pointed out that I used color to distinguish cases and I should use some markup instead. Bert: it reads well. … maybe reduce the number of colors. <addison> [37]https:// deploy-preview-155--bp-i18n-specdev.netlify.app/#characters [37] https://deploy-preview-155--bp-i18n-specdev.netlify.app/#characters addison: I'll eliminate some of the color. Do you want to see it again, or shall I just merge? … Seems you don't want to see it again. :-) addison: character section ^^ not has a box at the start that says where to read explanation. … I made a sort of glossary in order. So people get an idea why, eg., "character" is maybe not the term to use. … I may need other examples than Devanagari, maybe I <heart> Unicode. xfq: Should the box apply to the whole of the section instead? addison: Yes, good catch. r12a: @@ need good definition. addison: Section 4.2 says what to do, use code point. r12a: We use the word "character", e.g., further down. … "Use the term code point to refer to a Unicode character." but what is a Unicode character? … At some point we had the first mustard say something like avoid character unless... etc. addison: Avoid character, even with a local definition, because it is easy to get confused. … Advice to avoid the term, or define what you mean. r12a: "absctract character" addison: We actually don't have that in our glossary. r12a: We need to define it much more precisely. … A bit contradictory at the moment. … Tell me what you were thinking and I'll tell you how to write it. addison: Character set with abstract characters, which are not code points yet. r12a: I'll need to check the use of the term in our other texts now that I understand what you mean. <addison> [38]https://www.unicode.org/ glossary/#abstract_character [38] https://www.unicode.org/glossary/#abstract_character r12a: So: An abstract character is a notional item in a character set, before it is being assigned to a code point, addison: All these terms are vague, for a reason. r12a: May want to say that it is an item in the *UNicode* character set. There may be other character sets. addison: Is this text closer to the mark than previously? r12a: I think so, but it takes some time to review. addison: There are some left-over things. … There is one other big chnage: … Moved definition of string right after definitionof character. … It felt weird not to put string directly after character. … No changes to the section, though. addison: Last week's merged text is in the version on GitHub, but not in the published version yet. <r12a> [39]https:// deploy-preview-155--bp-i18n-specdev.netlify.app/#char_display [39] https://deploy-preview-155--bp-i18n-specdev.netlify.app/#char_display r12a: "Specifications, software and content MUST NOT require or depend on a one-to-one mapping between characters and visual text units." … I think text units is a mistake. <r12a> [40]https://www.w3.org/TR/ international-specs/#char_display [40] https://www.w3.org/TR/international-specs/#char_display r12a: Explanation missing that these are glyphs from a font. … What is meant is glyph, not visual text unit. … And explanation of what is a glyph. addison: It doesn't talk about fonts, but it could do. … Should introduce explanation of code point and grapheme cluster to glyph? r12a: Not sure you need to. addison: Trying to minimalist in what we introduce. … The Hindi example was useful, because I could return to it later. … But it is all three bytes, so you don't see some of the other isses. … Could do an example with a flag. <r12a> [41]https://www.w3.org/TR/ international-specs/#char_term_def [41] https://www.w3.org/TR/international-specs/#char_term_def r12a: I mentioned before about defining a character set. <r12a> Specifications SHOULD explicitly define the term 'character' to mean a Unicode code point. r12a: This ^^ is what we have. <r12a> [42]https://www.w3.org/TR/ international-specs/#char_specific [42] https://www.w3.org/TR/international-specs/#char_specific <r12a> Specifications SHOULD use specific terms, when available, instead of the general term 'character'. <r12a> When specifications use the term 'character' the specifications MUST define which meaning they intend, and SHOULD explicitly define the term 'character' to mean a Unicode code point. r12a: There is a bit of repetition between the above. But says that, if you use characte, syou shoulkd define it. And shold probably add: and use it consistently. <addison> > Specifications SHOULD use the term code point instead of the term 'character'. If the term 'character' is used, it MUST be explicitly defined to mean a Unicode code point. The term Unicode Scalar Value MAY also be used. r12a: I was never entirely happy with defining abstract character. Prefer to define character to be what you want and then use that. addison: But this is advice to spec writers. r12a: Not sure we need to push them to mean a specific thing, as long as they define what they mean. addison: And then we tell them when they are wrong? OK. … Example 7: I wanted to make a better guide for spec writers. … Like some of the things in richard's articles. … Thinking of the styling. Do you [Richard] have examples? r12a: I like a red cross, but that is usually for code. AOB? Summary of action items 1. [43]xfq: ask bidi related groups about pointerevents 505
Received on Monday, 24 March 2025 02:33:11 UTC