14:42:12 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #i18ncore
14:42:12 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2006/12/12-i18ncore-irc
14:42:20 <fsasaki> meeting: i18n core Working Group
14:42:23 <fsasaki> chair: Francois
14:42:27 <fsasaki> scribe: Felix
14:42:31 <fsasaki> scribeNick: fsasaki
14:42:43 <fsasaki> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2006Dec/0012.html
14:42:50 <fsasaki> rrsagent, make log public
14:59:23 <MickM> MickM has joined #i18ncore
14:59:34 <Zakim> I18N_CoreWG()10:00AM has now started
14:59:41 <Zakim> + +1.408.404.aaaa
15:00:01 <fyergeau> fyergeau has joined #i18ncore
15:00:36 <Zakim> +Michael
15:00:48 <Zakim> +Felix
15:01:01 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:01:06 <fyergeau> zakim, [ is fyergeau
15:01:07 <Zakim> +fyergeau; got it
15:03:13 <fsasaki> topic: action items
15:03:28 <fsasaki> topic: last minutes
15:03:32 <fsasaki> approved
15:03:44 <fsasaki> action: Felix to ask for an extension for CSS 2.1 review (DONE)
15:03:55 <fsasaki> action: Felix to gather pointers for Michael about W3C in general ... (DONE)
15:04:08 <fsasaki> action:  Felix to go back to Bjoern saying Martins mail is a WG answer (DONE)
15:04:26 <r12a> r12a has joined #i18ncore
15:04:34 <r12a> zakim, dial richard-home please
15:04:34 <Zakim> ok, r12a; the call is being made
15:04:35 <Zakim> +Richard
15:04:38 <fsasaki> francois: got a reply from Bjoern, might want to discuss it later
15:04:56 <fsasaki> action: Felix to go back to the WG finally (DONE)
15:05:17 <fsasaki> action: Felix to write a mail about possibility for SVG tiny specific IRI tests to martin and the i18n core list (PENDING)
15:05:56 <fsasaki> action: Francois to have a look at issue 3698 and gather information on options for diacrictics in collations (ONGOING)
15:06:26 <fsasaki> francois: so far, found oracle collation which has some parameterization
15:06:39 <fsasaki> .. for those collations, diacritics are not independent of case
15:08:09 <fsasaki> action: All to read Martins comments on IDNA issues (ONGOING)
15:09:01 <fsasaki> action: Felix to see what has to be updated on tutorial material for IDNA issues
15:09:23 <fsasaki> note of martin http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2006Oct/0013.html
15:10:09 <fsasaki> felix: let's drop AI 7, I do AI 8
15:10:20 <fsasaki> action: Felix to to classify open LTLI issues (DONE)
15:10:32 <fsasaki> action: Francois to build a current issues list on charmod norm (PENDING)
15:10:43 <fsasaki> action: Francois to give input to wiki for the LTLI summary (ONGOING)
15:10:55 <fsasaki> francois: update from Mark, Felix updated LTLI draft later
15:12:27 <fsasaki> action: Francois to review InkML LC draft (PENDING)
15:12:40 <fsasaki> felix: LC is until 18 December
15:12:53 <fsasaki> richard: we talk on tuesday, and see if we need an extension
15:13:04 <fsasaki> action: Richard to find out what is the canonical URI for BCP47 (ONGOING)
15:13:27 <fsasaki> richard: got various URIs from the IETF, Philippe Le Hegaret (IETF Liaison from W3C) is working on it
15:14:51 <fsasaki> topic: IDNA issue update
15:14:59 <fsasaki> francois: concluded during AI review
15:15:05 <fsasaki> topic: IRI tests for XML Schema
15:17:52 <fsasaki> felix describes the mail http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2006Dec/0011.html
15:18:08 <fsasaki> francois: testing resolving is good
15:18:53 <fsasaki> .. but just to have a test to verify that IRI does not blow up everything would be good
15:19:09 <fsasaki> .. validating a document that contains an instance of anyURI
15:19:15 <fsasaki> .. is necessary as well
15:19:51 <r12a> zakim, who's here ?
15:19:51 <Zakim> On the phone I see Ienup, Michael, Felix, fyergeau, Richard
15:19:52 <Zakim> On IRC I see r12a, fyergeau, MickM, RRSAgent, Zakim, fsasaki
15:20:04 <fsasaki> .. i.e. positive tests 
15:20:51 <fsasaki> action: Felix to go back to schema people with our test ideas for XML schema anyURI
15:21:06 <fsasaki> topic: XQuery full text review - udpate?
15:21:29 <fsasaki> felix: postpone to next week, let's look at it next week
15:21:37 <fsasaki> topic: LTLI update
15:24:55 <fsasaki> richard: BP statements should be first, explanations later
15:25:32 <fsasaki> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-core/2006OctDec/0026.html
15:25:42 <fsasaki> - What topic is *not* covered by the document yet? By "covered" I don't
15:25:44 <fsasaki> mean that the text about the topic is completely finished, but that the
15:25:45 <fsasaki> topic has a - more or less filled - place in the document.
15:25:47 <fsasaki> - Do you agree with the general structure of the document?
15:26:17 <fsasaki> - I have integrated best practices statements in each subsection of sec. 3
15:26:18 <fsasaki> (except sec. 3.6, not done yet), and in sec. 4. Do you agree with this
15:26:20 <fsasaki> approach? Should we get rid of the normative statements in sec. 6, or sec.
15:26:21 <fsasaki> 6 as a whole?
15:28:07 <fsasaki> richard: feels strange to have both BP and conformance statements
15:28:18 <fsasaki> .. with only BP, we don't have power to enforce s.t.
15:28:42 <fsasaki> francois: TAG document has a lot of wheight, with only BP
15:30:55 <fsasaki> richard: we need to think if we want to demote sec. 6 by calling the other stuff BP
15:31:06 <fsasaki> .. not sure if that is good
15:31:29 <fsasaki> .. if everything is BP, but sec. 6 is important for people to do
15:31:34 <fsasaki> .. that is difficult
15:31:57 <fsasaki> francois: difficult to have both normative and BP statements
15:32:16 <fsasaki> .. the web arch has BP statements, but also refers to RFC 2119
15:32:29 <fsasaki> .. so they make the BP statements normative
15:32:52 <fsasaki> richard: no, I consider BP statements like in Geo. Here, "should" clarifiers the language only
15:33:28 <fsasaki> .. the conformance section should say "if you develop specs at W3C, you need to take the following into account: ..."
15:33:40 <fsasaki> francois: the web arch does not have that, I think
15:35:10 <fsasaki> .. for LTLI we want to have some normative statements to use within w3c
15:35:27 <fsasaki> francois: for LTLI, we also say s.t. how to identify locales
15:36:12 <fsasaki> "* Core of a locale: language (mostly). No need (or ability) for LTLI to define the rest."
15:36:22 <fsasaki> from http://esw.w3.org/topic/i18nLTLI
15:37:13 <fsasaki> francois: we can say normatively "use a language identifier (BCP 47) as the core of the locale" 
15:37:32 <fsasaki> .. editorial thing: difference between CLDR and LDML
15:37:49 <fsasaki> .. there is also an ISO thing about locale
15:38:00 <fsasaki> action: francois to look after ISO locale related spec
15:40:48 <fsasaki> general agreement that normative statement about language identifier (BCP 47) as the core of the locale would be valuable in LTLI
15:43:07 <fsasaki> richard: need to change "RFC 4646" to "... or its successor"
15:43:47 <fsasaki> action: felix to update LTLI with "or its successor " statements
15:44:33 <fsasaki> action: all to give feedback on LTLI update
15:45:05 <fsasaki> topic: PLS comments
15:45:23 <r12a> http://www.w3.org/Search/Mail/Team/search?type-index=w3t&index-type=t&keywords=%27Canonical%27+URI+for+BCP+47+&search=Search
15:45:35 <r12a> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-core/2006OctDec/0024.html
15:46:03 <fsasaki> richard: a number of comments and my take on whose
15:46:21 <fsasaki> r 103-7
15:46:25 <fsasaki> s/r/R/
15:48:00 <fsasaki> R 103-20
15:48:11 <fsasaki> richard: we should try to get them to reference to BCP 47
15:48:21 <fsasaki> .. we hope to provide the right URI within a week or so
15:48:42 <fsasaki> francois: so "at least update rfc 4646, and please BCP 47"
15:48:56 <fsasaki> R103-21
15:49:29 <fsasaki> richard: should remove dc:language example, it's confusing
15:49:32 <fsasaki> francois: yes
15:50:02 <fsasaki> R103-30
15:50:20 <fsasaki> (later)
15:50:25 <fsasaki> R103-45
15:50:41 <fsasaki> francois: fine
15:50:55 <fsasaki> R103-36
15:52:14 <fsasaki> <lexeme role="mypos:noun">
15:52:41 <r12a> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-core/2006OctDec/0024.html
15:52:48 <fsasaki> francois: shorthand for the concatenation of namespace URI and verb
15:52:54 <fsasaki> .. do they define it?
15:53:10 <fsasaki> richard: don't think so. Also: is it normal to have this as an attribute value?
15:53:23 <fsasaki> francois: yes, you could say: it is an XPath with one component
15:54:43 <fsasaki> .. there is a new spec which has a name for this  
15:55:29 <fsasaki> .. they should prefer to s.t. to justify the usage
15:56:11 <fsasaki> richard: it is a little confusing
15:56:27 <fsasaki> francois: it is called CURIEs
15:57:45 <fsasaki> richard: will go back to them asking to explain how their mechanism works, or use a simpler examply
15:57:59 <fsasaki>  R103-26
15:58:09 <fsasaki> (fine)
15:58:16 <fsasaki> R103-33
15:58:33 <fsasaki> richard: don't see the expansion, otherwise I'm fine
15:59:03 <fsasaki>  R103-30
15:59:12 <fsasaki> richard: they are not having markup for bidi
15:59:27 <fsasaki> .. they say "people can use the unicode control characters"
15:59:32 <fsasaki> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-core/2006OctDec/0025.html
16:00:37 <Zakim> -Felix
16:01:05 <Zakim> +Felix
16:10:38 <Zakim> -Michael
16:10:42 <Zakim> -Ienup
16:11:40 <Zakim> -fyergeau
16:11:43 <Zakim> -Felix
16:11:50 <Zakim> -Richard
16:11:52 <Zakim> I18N_CoreWG()10:00AM has ended
16:11:54 <Zakim> Attendees were +1.408.404.aaaa, Michael, Felix, [IPcaller], fyergeau, Ienup, Richard
16:12:25 <fsasaki> present: Felix, Francois, Ienup, Michael, Richard
16:12:33 <fsasaki> regrets: Karunesh, Vijay
16:12:38 <fsasaki> rrsagent,draft minutes
16:12:38 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/12/12-i18ncore-minutes.html fsasaki
17:23:48 <r12a> r12a has left #i18ncore
18:24:26 <Zakim> Zakim has left #i18ncore