See also: IRC log
agendum 1. "action items" taken up [from fsasaki]
ACTION: Felix to contact person for ATOM
Yves: http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0505WordCount
ACTION: Richard to contact person from w3c about feedback from non-wg members
AZ: worked on word count
.. needs to check with wg if it meets the its reqs
.. keept the previous comments so far
Yves: leave that for next time until there are comments
<YvesS> http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0503ReqSpan
tim to lock at span-like element
<scribe> ACTION: tim to lock at span-like element (PENDING) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/07/06-i18n-minutes.html#action01]
<YvesS> http://www.w3.org/International/its#work
<scribe> ACTION: Yves to reorder work items on main page DONE [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/07/06-i18n-minutes.html#action02]
Yves: felix feedback from project
review: we should publish very fast
... within days
<YvesS> http://www.w3.org/International/its/requirements/
Yves: worked on document for
reqs
... link shows current state of document
... we will have all work items there
... and just fill in what we have
ri: you need a couple of
things
... as part of the publishing process
... Yves and Felix will work through that process
Yves: do we need a formal vote in the wg?
ri: yes
<scribe> ACTION: Yves and Felix to finish up the first draft [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/07/06-i18n-minutes.html#action03]
ri: we have to minute
confirmation from the wg for publishing the wd
... that's one of the requirements for publishing
<YvesS> http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0503ReqBackground
yves: was there a comment from
RI?
... there was only a few changes
... comments?
(no comments)
scribe: let's move it to WD
<YvesS> http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0503ReqWhoShouldRead
yves: "who should read this
document"
... some addition after felix comments
felix: liked the changes
yves: move it to WD?
... ok, it will be WD
<YvesS> http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0503ReqOverview
Yves: "Overview"
... addressing comments from RI
there was an example at the end of the last paragraph
<YvesS> http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0503ReqOverview?action=diff&rev2=4&rev1=3
scribe: link shows the differences between the versions
RI: like the changes Yves did
Yves: not formal wording like in
the reqs themself.
... move to WD?
... let's move it to WD
<YvesS> http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0504ReqKeyDefinitions
Yves: "Definitions"
... at the top of introduction
<r12a> http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0504ReqKeyDefinitions?action=diff&rev2=8&rev1=7
difference was trying to replace schematron by RELAX NG (request from RI)
<YvesS> http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0504ReqKeyDefinitions?action=diff&rev2=8&rev1=7
RI: wanted RELAX NG, don't remember why
Yves: will remove schematron, leave RELAX NG
<YvesS> http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0506ReqConstraints
Yves: now about the reqs
themselves
... "constraint" req
... main change after comment from Felix
<YvesS> http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0506ReqConstraints?action=diff&rev2=10&rev1=9
felix: like the changes
yves: other comments?
... so this goes also to WD.
<YvesS> http://esw.w3.org/topic/its0504ReqCulturalAspects
Yves: from masaki "cultural aspect"
masaki: made some changes
changed country name
scribe: it was yugoslavia
... put something like a standard date format into it
... changed Japanese example
Yves: one comment on that
... would the h(???) be better
zh
RI: you can specify that with the current system
will be much better with rfc 3066bis
RI: the chinese example states a
problem, but doesn't say what the req is to solve the
problem
... what do we need? xml:lang? tags? another mechanism?
... we need to specify that
masaki: recently there is lot's
of specs on locale and country codes
... do we need more? is there enough with the current
system?
... e.g. the zh case already has a solution
RI: I think there is now a code for swiss german
masaki: how about
aserbadjian?
... locale for aserbadjian
RI: there is still work on that
being done
... e.g. by the core wg.
... still a potential issue
... but we should say: why is it an issue, not in terms of the
solution
... maybe met by the core work
masaki: if it is discussed in core, i could point to the core group
ri: hasen't been discussed yet.
yves: we need additional informaion on locale, that's in the summary. Do we need more text e.g. in the challenges section?
ri: concept of representing
orthography will be representable very soon
... with rfc 3066bis other problems will go away as well
... all what is said in the summary will be possible to be
managed with rfc 3066bis
... the question is: are we talking about xml:lang values
... or are we talking about other attributes related to locale
etc.?
masaki: I see the point
yves: you want to talk about dates, calenders etc.?
ri: if we need to specify locale
for a date format
... that's something different
... so we have to say what we will focus on
yves: we talk about xml:lang in another req
masaki: this is an additional on
top of it
... there should be more than xml:lang
... do we have other examples?
... somebody said "a date format could solve the req"
... you want to know whether Japanese uses wareki or western
style time
i.e. date format
ri: I can see the scenario
... it's the other stuff in the req we have problems with
yves: should we remove the two examples which don't fit
<r12a> FAQ by Addison (in preparation) that has some bearing here: http://esw.w3.org/topic/geoFAQxmllang
felix: would be hard to have a fixed set of values for a @context attribute
ri: who would use the attribute?
masaki: it would be used in the
target language
... there is only one source
... as you translate, it could be translated in two different
ways
... e.g. in the case of desu / masu
... if you reuse the content, you need information about the
context / e.g. the writing style
... this is always about target languages
... example: italian users like different styles for user
interfaces
ri: do we have an attribute in the english source or in the target side?
masaki: context could be specified in the english side, writing style at the target side (Japanese)
ri: how would the attribute be used?
masaki: for a cms, you have 1000
units of Japanese and english
... you might wonder if they are consistent with respect to
writing style (in the target language)
... content builder would use this information
yves: or translation memory
systems?
... at some point the source becomes the target
ri: could you rephrase the requirement as you just explained it?
masaki: you're right.
... can change the requirements to writing styles
... will change the title to something about writing styles
ri: locale is something we should continue thinking about
masaki: will keep that in my mind
yves: started a page for the
meeting
... one question was the hotel
would a hotel close to antibe better or not?
ri: I would prefer to stay in antibe, if we could get a car.
<YvesS> http://www.w3.org/International/its/ftf-200509-Sophia.html
yves: felix will update the page
with new information
... we have to think about agenda in the three days
... need to organize it efficient
... as soon as you know whether you will come, tell
Felix
<scribe> ACTION: everybody to think about participation [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/07/06-i18n-minutes.html#action04]
masaki: is not sure about participation yet, will probably know in August
yves: other comments on f2f?
yves: felix is team contact now
ri: will still be here at the
telecon
... I'll be helping Yves and felix with the practical
aspects
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.126 of Date: 2005/05/16 16:49:48 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Got date from IRC log name: 6 Jul 2005 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2005/07/06-i18n-minutes.html People with action items: everybody felix tim yves[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]