14:44:27 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #i18ncore
14:44:27 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2006/12/19-i18ncore-irc
14:44:32 <fsasaki> meeting: i18n core Working Group
14:44:34 <fsasaki> chair: Francois
14:44:38 <fsasaki> scribe: Felix
14:44:42 <fsasaki> scribeNick: fsasaki
14:44:49 <fsasaki> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2006Dec/0020.html
14:45:25 <fsasaki> regrets: Ienup
14:45:30 <fsasaki> rrsagent, make log public
14:51:04 <MickM> MickM has joined #i18ncore
14:59:23 <Zakim> I18N_CoreWG()10:00AM has now started
14:59:31 <Zakim> +Michael
15:00:27 <Zakim> -Michael
15:00:28 <Zakim> +Michael
15:00:29 <fyergeau> fyergeau has joined #i18ncore
15:00:30 <Zakim> +Felix
15:01:08 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:01:09 <fyergeau> zakim, [ is fyergeau
15:01:09 <Zakim> +fyergeau; got it
15:02:08 <r12a> r12a has joined #i18ncore
15:02:17 <r12a> zakim, dial richard
15:02:17 <Zakim> ok, r12a; the call is being made
15:02:18 <Zakim> +Richard
15:03:03 <r12a> zakim, who's here ?
15:03:03 <Zakim> On the phone I see Michael, Felix, fyergeau, Richard
15:03:04 <Zakim> On IRC I see r12a, fyergeau, MickM, RRSAgent, Zakim, fsasaki
15:03:47 <fsasaki> topic: last meetings minutes
15:04:34 <fsasaki> approved
15:04:37 <fsasaki> topic: review of actions
15:04:57 <fsasaki> ACTION: all to give feedback on LTLI update (PENDING)
15:05:20 <fsasaki> ACTION: Felix to go back to schema people with our test ideas for XML Schema (DONE)
15:05:37 <fsasaki> ACTION: Felix to see what has to be updated on tutorial material for IDNA issues (DONE)
15:05:42 <fsasaki> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-core/2006OctDec/0045.html
15:07:29 <fsasaki> Felix: should we bring that to GEO?
15:07:58 <fsasaki> Richard: might be good to include the GEO folks in a separate mail
15:08:16 <fsasaki> .. on the proposal in general: what makes certain things invalid?
15:09:39 <r12a> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-alvestrand-idna-bidi-00.txt
15:09:48 <Zakim> +Karunesh_Arora
15:12:17 <fsasaki> francois: the RFC says that it must end with a strong RTL or LTR character
15:12:26 <fsasaki> .. a combining character is not possible, that is the issue
15:12:36 <fsasaki> richard: what about control characters?
15:12:48 <fsasaki> francois: don't found the word joiner in the draft
15:13:40 <vijay> vijay has joined #i18Ncore
15:13:41 <fsasaki> richard: the article tries to be very high level
15:13:52 <fsasaki> .. linking to an RFC is s.t. we would try to avoid
15:14:14 <fsasaki> francois: here it is even no RFC, but a draft which will expire
15:17:38 <fsasaki> (discussion on how to bring the information of the internet draft into i18n activity material)
15:19:00 <fsasaki> richard: have a short note in the article about "combining characters should not be at the end of a label" would to it, right?
15:19:03 <fsasaki> felix: yes
15:19:53 <fsasaki> richard: how about a blog entry about the detail? This is better than an article, since the issue is of temporal interest 
15:19:58 <fsasaki> felix: fine with me
15:21:05 <fsasaki> francois: the IRI / IDN article needs to mention the issue
15:21:15 <fsasaki> .. also the pages on browsers
15:21:28 <fsasaki> richard: these pages have a section saying "does it work today?"
15:21:32 <fsasaki> .. these need an update
15:21:48 <fsasaki> francois: current status is: they have reanabled them and they have a white list
15:22:06 <fsasaki> .. so does it work? yes, but: there are restrictions (TLDs, RTL scripts)
15:22:17 <fsasaki> richard: yes, we could add s.t. in the article as well
15:22:26 <fsasaki> .. Michael, would you like to do s.t. like that?
15:22:33 <fsasaki> Michael: sure
15:23:00 <r12a> http://www.w3.org/International/articles/idn-and-iri/#work
15:23:58 <fsasaki> action: Michael to propose an update to the section "does it work?" about domain names, see what needs to be sad these days
15:24:25 <fsasaki> action: Richard to add the alverstrand draft to the IRI / IDN article
15:24:39 <fsasaki> s/section/section in the IRI - IDN draft/
15:25:43 <fsasaki> action: Felix to prepare a text of a blog entry about the IRI / IDN issue in the alverstrand draft and send it Richard
15:26:23 <fsasaki> Richard: write it an news paper style, to help people
15:27:14 <fsasaki> action: Felix to update LTLI with "or its successor " statements (DONE)
15:27:27 <fsasaki> action: Francois to look after ISO locale related spec (DONE)
15:27:32 <fyergeau> ISO TR 14652
15:28:10 <fsasaki> francois: was later replaced by the Unicode CLDR
15:28:29 <fsasaki> .. it had many problems. But some linux systems made use of that data
15:28:41 <fsasaki> s/replaced/replaced (not officially, but effectively)/
15:29:22 <fsasaki> francois: may be worth mentioning in LTLI, just for completness
15:29:41 <fsasaki> action: Felix to write a mail about possibility for SVG tiny specific IRI tests to martin and the i18n core list (PENDING)
15:29:59 <fsasaki> felix: might phone chris and ask him
15:30:02 <fsasaki> francois: yes
15:30:14 <fsasaki> action: Francois to build a current issues list on charmod norm (PENDING)
15:30:29 <fsasaki> action: Francois to have a look at issue 3698 and gather information on options for diacrictics in collations (PENDING)
15:30:52 <fsasaki> action: Francois to review InkML LC draft (DROPPED)
15:31:04 <fsasaki> richard: I reviewed InkML, we can discuss it today if possible
15:31:17 <fsasaki> action: Richard to find out what is the canonical URI for BCP47 (ONGOING)
15:32:07 <fsasaki> Francois: the IETF points to the RFC-Editor officially , so I'm not convinced by Martin's arguments
15:33:06 <fsasaki> topic: XML Schema tests (again)
15:35:12 <fsasaki> (Felix summarizes the discussion)
15:35:34 <fsasaki> Francois: we had sad that a test for an attribute typed as anyURI would be valuable
15:36:54 <Zakim> +??P4
15:37:17 <fyergeau> zakim, ? is MarkDavis
15:37:17 <Zakim> +MarkDavis; got it
15:37:53 <fsasaki> francois: we should go back to them and insist
15:37:57 <fsasaki> felix: agree
15:38:31 <fsasaki> francois: one IRI in the test suite to verify anyURI would be good
15:38:43 <fsasaki> action: Felix to go back to XML Schema people with WG reply on IRI tests
15:39:07 <fsasaki> topic: LTLI  update
15:41:20 <fsasaki> (Felix gives a summary of last week's discussion)
15:42:01 <fsasaki> Francois: the TAG document uses "best practices" as "normative statements"
15:42:14 <fsasaki> .. they just go on and say "this is a good practice"
15:42:23 <fsasaki> .. we could do the same thing by removing section 6
15:42:44 <fsasaki> .. at http://www.w3.org/International/core/langtags/#sec-locale-vs-language
15:43:25 <fsasaki> .. we could remove that section and maybe also sec. 5, or rewrite it
15:43:47 <fsasaki> Mark: what in sec. 6 should not be normative?
15:44:15 <fsasaki> Francois: statement 1 "Specifications that make use of language tags or locale values MUST meet the conformance criteria defined for "well-formed" processors, as defined in sec. 2.2.9 of [RFC 4646]."
15:44:29 <fsasaki> Mark: well-formed is just the syntax
15:45:43 <fsasaki> Francois: we want to say "refer to BCP 47"
15:45:51 <fsasaki> Mark: there is a value in statement no. 2
15:46:02 <fsasaki> .. there are circumstances where you don't want to validate values
15:46:12 <fsasaki> .. if s..t comes from a trusted source
15:46:21 <fsasaki> .. it is unlikely, but it could happen
15:46:56 <fsasaki> francois: RFC 4646 and 4647: don't these documents discuss such things?
15:47:12 <fsasaki> Mark: these docments describe what it means to be valid / well-formed
15:47:58 <fsasaki> .. the wording in sec. 6 of LTLI is nice, it does not say you have to validate
15:48:45 <fsasaki> .. the statements 1 and 2 are useful
15:49:08 <fsasaki> s/nice,/nice; RFC 4646/
15:49:17 <fsasaki> Mark: no 1 in particular is very useful
15:49:32 <fsasaki> .. esp. for other w3c specs
15:49:56 <fsasaki> .. no. 2 is slightly less valuable, because it is like saying "I conform to RFC 4646"
15:50:17 <fsasaki> Francois: we want to tell spec writers that they have to use whose definitions from RFC 4646
15:50:25 <fsasaki> .. were are going for validity, Mark?
15:50:32 <fsasaki> Mark: for validity, you check the registry
15:50:37 <fsasaki> .. you make a copy of the registry
15:51:21 <fsasaki> .. checking against a list of subtags
15:52:09 <fsasaki> Francois: were do you want to place the obligation to check validity or well-formedness?
15:52:45 <fsasaki> .. take e.g. xml:lang? XML Core WG discussed what validation should be done for xml:lang
15:53:03 <fsasaki> .. the parser does not do anything to language tags except passing it to the application
15:53:13 <fsasaki> Mark: there is a backwards compatibility issue here
15:53:41 <fsasaki> .. the new syntax in RFC 4646 is narrower than RFC 3066
15:53:58 <fsasaki> Francois: even the narrow syntax of RFC 3066 was removed from the xml spec?
15:54:07 <fsasaki> s/spec?/spec/
15:54:29 <fsasaki> Francois: in the HTTP protocol: should an HTTP receiver check the well-formedness of tag?
15:54:46 <fsasaki> Mark: there is a lot of crap in these area, we did a lot of tests
15:55:07 <fsasaki> .. e.g. accept-lang can contain a word like "spanish" or complete rubbish
15:55:17 <fsasaki> .. you could say "XML parser MUST validate"
15:55:42 <fsasaki> .. another possibility to say "it could only be interpreted if valid"
15:56:09 <fsasaki> Francois: that sounds better. You cannot write any type of spec with a MUST to check well-formedness
15:56:36 <fsasaki> .. the XML spec does not satisfy no. 1, and there is no need to do that
15:57:16 <fsasaki> Mark: the weakest thing we should say: if you interpret the language tag, interpret it as RFC 4646
15:57:24 <fsasaki> .. actually BCP 47
15:57:42 <fsasaki> RESOLUTION: agreement to have a statement like "if you interpret the language tag, interpret it as RFC 4646" in LTLI
15:57:57 <fsasaki> Francois: if you have a specification which includes language tagging
15:58:28 <fsasaki> .. you MUST say "this must be according to BCP 47"
15:59:09 <fsasaki> .. we should say: Specifications that specify language tagging of any short should say that the semantics and syntax or that should folow BCP 47
15:59:20 <fsasaki> .. without forcing implementations of the spec to do so
15:59:52 <fsasaki> RESOLUTION: Have a statement like "Specifications that specify language tagging of any short should say that the semantics and syntax or that should folow BCP 47 without forcing implementations of the spec to do so" in LTLI
16:00:20 <fsasaki> Mark: we could have one further statement like
16:00:42 <fsasaki> s/folow/follow/
16:01:00 <fsasaki> s/without forcing implementations of the spec to do so/without forcing implementations of the spec to verify wellformedness or validity/
16:01:48 <fsasaki> Mark: if I "hit" a language tag that is not well-formed or invalid, I should not interpret it as a language tag
16:02:26 <fsasaki> .. example: xml:lang says "English". That is an invalid tag. I should not interpret it
16:03:10 <fsasaki> .. this is saying "this is what you have to do if you get an invalid tag?"
16:04:53 <fsasaki> .. if I process UTF-8 and get e.g. C080
16:05:21 <fsasaki> francois: it is like the xml spec which says "if you are not well-formed, you should stop processing"
16:05:41 <fsasaki> mark: we don't need to stop, you could e.g. transform the invalid value into s.t. valid
16:06:13 <fsasaki> .. but what you should not do is interpret it into s.t. that propregates the error
16:06:59 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/12/19-i18ncore-minutes.html fsasaki
16:07:15 <fsasaki> topic: discussion on IDNs
16:07:22 <fsasaki> mark: there is a dicussion on IDNs ongoing
16:07:33 <fsasaki> .. it would be good to join
16:07:39 <fsasaki> Francois: it is an IETF list?
16:07:48 <fsasaki> Mark: I send the information to the core list
16:08:23 <fsasaki> .. the key feature is : a number of people wants to limit the number of strings in IDNs, e.g. disallowing combinging marks
16:09:06 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/12/19-i18ncore-minutes.html fsasaki
16:09:30 <Zakim> -MarkDavis
16:09:47 <r12a> http://www.w3.org/International/reviews/0612-inkML/
16:09:57 <r12a> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-InkML-20061023/
16:10:16 <fsasaki> topic: InkML comments
16:12:50 <fsasaki> richard: they don't use xml:lang anywhere
16:12:56 <fsasaki> .. I'm saying "why?"
16:13:26 <fsasaki> .. I'm also saying "xml:lang should be used for indicating the language of the document"
16:14:45 <fsasaki> .. I want to confirm with you that xml:lang is not appropriate for following the traces
16:14:52 <fsasaki> Francois: I disagree
16:15:28 <fsasaki> .. if the document has traces, xml:lang can apply to the traces
16:15:59 <fsasaki> richard: an element like  <annotation type="contentCategory">Text/en</annotation> can be used to say what language the traces should be
16:16:22 <fsasaki> .. I'm happy with them not using xml:lang here
16:16:56 <fsasaki> Francois: xml:lang has strict scoping rules, which don't apply for <annotation type="contentCategory">Text/en</annotation>, so it's good not to use xml:lang here
16:17:03 <fsasaki> Richard: the same in SSML
16:18:24 <fsasaki> .. now on comment 11: about time string
16:18:30 <fsasaki> .. they creat a time stamp
16:22:16 <fsasaki> s/creat/create/
16:28:14 <Zakim> -Felix
16:28:48 <Zakim> +Felix
16:30:52 <Zakim> -Karunesh_Arora
16:30:54 <Zakim> -Michael
16:30:55 <Zakim> -fyergeau
16:30:56 <Zakim> -Richard
16:30:57 <Zakim> -Felix
16:30:58 <Zakim> I18N_CoreWG()10:00AM has ended
16:31:00 <Zakim> Attendees were Michael, Felix, [IPcaller], fyergeau, Richard, Karunesh_Arora, MarkDavis
16:31:11 <fsasaki> (people will look at the comments today or tomorrow, Richard will send them out tomorrow)
16:31:14 <fsasaki> topic: next meeting
16:31:27 <fsasaki> next weeks meeting cancelled, good holiday for everybody
16:31:34 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/12/19-i18ncore-minutes.html fsasaki
16:31:42 <vijay> bye
16:31:48 <vijay> \quit
16:36:48 <RRSAgent> I see 14 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2006/12/19-i18ncore-actions.rdf :
16:36:48 <RRSAgent> ACTION: all to give feedback on LTLI update (PENDING) [1]
16:36:48 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/12/19-i18ncore-irc#T15-04-57
16:36:48 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Felix to go back to schema people with our test ideas for XML Schema (DONE) [2]
16:36:48 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/12/19-i18ncore-irc#T15-05-20
16:36:48 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Felix to see what has to be updated on tutorial material for IDNA issues (DONE) [3]
16:36:48 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/12/19-i18ncore-irc#T15-05-37
16:36:48 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Michael to propose an update to the section "does it work?" about domain names, see what needs to be sad these days [4]
16:36:48 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/12/19-i18ncore-irc#T15-23-58
16:36:48 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Richard to add the alverstrand draft to the IRI / IDN article [5]
16:36:48 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/12/19-i18ncore-irc#T15-24-25
16:36:48 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Felix to prepare a text of a blog entry about the IRI / IDN issue in the alverstrand draft and send it Richard [6]
16:36:48 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/12/19-i18ncore-irc#T15-25-43
16:36:48 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Felix to update LTLI with "or its successor " statements (DONE) [7]
16:36:48 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/12/19-i18ncore-irc#T15-27-14
16:36:48 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Francois to look after ISO locale related spec (DONE) [8]
16:36:48 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/12/19-i18ncore-irc#T15-27-27
16:36:48 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Felix to write a mail about possibility for SVG tiny specific IRI tests to martin and the i18n core list (PENDING) [9]
16:36:48 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/12/19-i18ncore-irc#T15-29-41
16:36:48 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Francois to build a current issues list on charmod norm (PENDING) [10]
16:36:48 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/12/19-i18ncore-irc#T15-30-14
16:36:48 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Francois to have a look at issue 3698 and gather information on options for diacrictics in collations (PENDING) [11]
16:36:48 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/12/19-i18ncore-irc#T15-30-29
16:36:48 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Francois to review InkML LC draft (DROPPED) [12]
16:36:48 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/12/19-i18ncore-irc#T15-30-52
16:36:48 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Richard to find out what is the canonical URI for BCP47 (ONGOING) [13]
16:36:48 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/12/19-i18ncore-irc#T15-31-17
16:36:48 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Felix to go back to XML Schema people with WG reply on IRI tests [14]
16:36:48 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/12/19-i18ncore-irc#T15-38-43
16:36:51 <Zakim> Zakim has left #i18ncore
16:36:54 <fsasaki> fsasaki has left #i18ncore