IRC log of i18ncore on 2007-01-23

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:52:49 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #i18ncore

14:52:49 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/01/23-i18ncore-irc

14:52:57 [fsasaki]

meeting: i18n Core WG

14:53:02 [fsasaki]

chair: Francois

14:53:04 [fsasaki]

scribe: Felix

14:53:09 [fsasaki]

scribeNick: fsasaki

14:53:15 [fsasaki]

agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2007Jan/0018.html

14:53:20 [fsasaki]

rrsagent, make log public

14:59:36 [fsasaki]

zakim, dial felix-home

14:59:36 [Zakim]

ok, fsasaki; the call is being made

14:59:37 [Zakim]

I18N_CoreWG()10:00AM has now started

14:59:38 [Zakim]

+Felix

15:00:32 [Zakim]

+Michael_Monaghan

15:00:40 [fyergeau]

fyergeau has joined #i18ncore

15:01:43 [mick]

mick has joined #i18ncore

15:01:47 [Zakim]

+Ienup_Sung

15:01:47 [Zakim]

+??P30

15:01:55 [fyergeau]

zakim, ? is fyergeau

15:01:55 [Zakim]

+fyergeau; got it

15:03:05 [fsasaki]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2007Jan/0018.html

15:03:13 [fsasaki]

topic: last week minutes

15:03:19 [fsasaki]

http://www.w3.org/2007/01/09-i18ncore-minutes

15:03:37 [fsasaki]

approved minutes

15:03:46 [fsasaki]

topic: action items

15:04:07 [fsasaki]

action: all to look at the C064 issue (ONGOING)

15:04:31 [fsasaki]

action: Felix to describe potential data binding review (DONE)

15:04:35 [fsasaki]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2007Jan/0012.html

15:04:49 [fsasaki]

s/12/13/

15:05:44 [fsasaki]

action: Felix to go back to the CSS WG saying that we did not come to do the CSS 2.1 review and need an extension until 16 Februrary (DONE)

15:05:50 [fsasaki]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2007Jan/0016.html

15:06:14 [fsasaki]

Felix: no reply yet

15:06:34 [fsasaki]

action: Felix to go back to WS policy and say i18n core is fine with the pocliy drafts (DONE)

15:06:46 [fsasaki]

Felix to go back to xml schema saying we will have IRI xml schema tests as part of the IRI test suite, no need to have them within the xml schema conformance test suite (DONE)

15:07:03 [fsasaki]

action: Felix to go back to xml schema saying we will have IRI xml schema tests as part of the IRI test suite, no need to have them within the xml schema conformance test suite (DONE)

15:07:31 [fsasaki]

action: Francois to reread Martins mail and to write a reply to him (PENDING)

15:07:52 [fsasaki]

action: Richard to go back to PLS folks (DONE)

15:08:53 [fsasaki]

action: all to give feedback on LTLI update (PENDING)

15:09:17 [fsasaki]

action: Felix to write a mail about possibility for SVG tiny specific IRI tests to martin and the i18n core list (PENDING)

15:09:40 [fsasaki]

action: Francois to build a current issues list on charmod norm (PENDING)

15:10:01 [fsasaki]

action: Francois to have a look at issue 3698 and gather information on options for diacrictics in collations (PENDING)

15:10:59 [fsasaki]

action: Michael to do the IDN work update (DONE)

15:11:19 [fsasaki]

Michael: drafted a scenario, I'll send it at the end of today

15:11:41 [fsasaki]

Felix: tx, we will discuss it next week

15:12:15 [fsasaki]

Michael: tested various browsers on Windows

15:12:42 [fsasaki]

.. I'll put the information in the draft

15:12:57 [fsasaki]

topic: Charmod C064 considered unclear

15:15:00 [fsasaki]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2007Jan/0013.html

15:18:32 [fsasaki]

(Felix explains the mail)

15:18:53 [fsasaki]

Francois: Unicode page has evolved since we promoted charmod

15:20:00 [fsasaki]

.. so charmod norm in relation to that Unicode page is a bit akward

15:21:01 [fsasaki]

.. we put a reference to C063 and C064 to avoid references to e.g. Unicode 1.0

15:22:18 [fsasaki]

.. I see Bjoerns point now, the latest version does not mean necessarly the latest published version

15:22:42 [fsasaki]

.. if the latest book is the level of precision you need, that is fine

15:23:16 [fsasaki]

.. I would put a note after C064 and C065 saying that

15:23:44 [fsasaki]

Felix: adding a note without changing the statement is fine

15:24:19 [fsasaki]

action: Francois to draft s.t. for a note about C064 / C065

15:25:29 [fsasaki]

Felix: should we maintain a reference?

15:25:39 [fsasaki]

Michael: no opinion

15:25:50 [fsasaki]

Ienup: we should avoid dublicatoin

15:26:02 [fsasaki]

s/dublicatoin/dublication/

15:26:11 [fsasaki]

.. it is responsibility of the Unicode consortium, not the W3C WG

15:26:38 [fsasaki]

.. I had a question: why do we have the contradictory wording, with Francois statement, I now understand

15:26:53 [fsasaki]

.. making a clarification, Bjoern might be ok

15:28:04 [fsasaki]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2006Dec/0031.html

15:29:33 [fsasaki]

Francois: we cannot maintain that information

15:29:47 [fsasaki]

Ienup: we could point Bjoern to the URL from Unicode

15:31:33 [fyergeau]

http://www.unicode.org/versions/enumeratedversions.html#Latest

15:32:01 [fsasaki]

Francois: we cannot give a guarentee if Unicode will maintain that pages

15:32:26 [fsasaki]

Ienup: we could ask the Unicode UTC for a clarification

15:32:38 [fsasaki]

.. i..e wether the URI will be maintained

15:32:50 [fsasaki]

.. next meeting will be in February

15:33:05 [fsasaki]

.. Feb 6-9

15:33:57 [fsasaki]

action: Ienup to go to the Unicode UTC and check the stability of the "latest version" URI for referencing Unicode

15:34:17 [fsasaki]

Ienup: I will write a mail about the question to you guys

15:34:21 [fsasaki]

Felix: ok

15:34:41 [fsasaki]

topic: LC drafts

15:36:10 [fsasaki]

action: Felix to go back to VBWG asking about our CCXML comments

15:36:50 [fsasaki]

Felix: input to data binding comments, see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2007Jan/0012.html

15:39:58 [fsasaki]

Felix: should we ask them to information about the BOM?

15:40:13 [fsasaki]

Francois: worried about that. BOM is specified in XML spec itself

15:45:33 [fsasaki]

.. don't think we should make it too wide

15:45:58 [fsasaki]

.. we should not make it too wide. Pointing to the Unicode FAQ is a good idea

15:46:32 [fsasaki]

Ienup: agree, we should refer to Unicode FAQ

15:47:57 [fsasaki]

Felix: next comment: should they refer to XML 1.1 as well?

15:48:38 [fsasaki]

Francois: for XML Schema 1.0 it does not make sense, since it is XML 1.0, for implementations it is useful

15:48:55 [fsasaki]

Felix: the spec is not about implementations, so let's drop this comment

15:50:16 [fsasaki]

http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/NOTE-timezone-20051013/

15:53:56 [fsasaki]

Francois: good to have a note about the differences between dateTime in xml schema and programming languages

15:55:19 [fsasaki]

.. on languageElement: agree with asking for a reference to BCP 47

15:56:25 [fsasaki]

topic: xml:base

15:56:49 [fsasaki]

Francois: I'll try to make a reply to Martin before 31 January

15:56:54 [fsasaki]

topic: c14n

15:57:03 [fsasaki]

Ienup: the document mentions BOM

15:57:20 [fsasaki]

.. saying that BOM should be stripped out for utf-16

15:57:59 [fsasaki]

.. it is referencing quite old definitions for utf-8 and utf-16, they are quite outdated, they should reference the current version of Unicode instead

15:58:14 [fsasaki]

.. that reference has important information related to security

15:58:46 [fsasaki]

Francois: for BOM, I need to look at the spec. As for the references: these are for the RFCs which control what utf-8 / utf-16 is on the internet

15:59:04 [fsasaki]

.. I think this should remain references to the proper RFCs, only utf-8 needs to be updated

15:59:10 [fsasaki]

.. for the BOM: where do you want a change?

15:59:14 [fsasaki]

Ienup: sec 2.1

16:00:49 [fsasaki]

"For UTF-16, the leading byte order mark is treated as an artifact of encoding and stripped from the UCS character data (subsequent zero width non-breaking spaces appearing within the UTF-16 data are not removed) [UTF-16, Section 3.2]"

16:00:55 [fsasaki]

should also mention utf-8

16:01:09 [fsasaki]

Francois: also update the references to Unicode

16:01:35 [fsasaki]

.. and rfc 2279 to 3629

16:02:34 [fsasaki]

action: Felix to go back to xml core with our comments on c14n

16:03:35 [Zakim]

-fyergeau

16:03:38 [Zakim]

-Michael_Monaghan

16:03:41 [Zakim]

-Ienup_Sung

16:03:42 [Zakim]

I18N_CoreWG()10:00AM has ended

16:03:44 [Zakim]

Attendees were Felix, Michael_Monaghan, Ienup_Sung, fyergeau

16:04:36 [fsasaki]

rrsagent, draft minutes

16:04:36 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/01/23-i18ncore-minutes.html fsasaki

16:16:00 [fsasaki]

rrsagent, make log public

16:16:02 [fsasaki]

rrsagent, draft minutes

16:16:02 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/01/23-i18ncore-minutes.html fsasaki

16:32:18 [fsasaki]

zakim, bye

16:32:19 [Zakim]

Zakim has left #i18ncore

16:32:22 [fsasaki]

rrsagent, bye

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

I see 16 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/23-i18ncore-actions.rdf :

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: all to look at the C064 issue (ONGOING) [1]

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/23-i18ncore-irc#T15-04-07

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Felix to describe potential data binding review (DONE) [2]

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/23-i18ncore-irc#T15-04-31

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Felix to go back to the CSS WG saying that we did not come to do the CSS 2.1 review and need an extension until 16 Februrary (DONE) [3]

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/23-i18ncore-irc#T15-05-44

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Felix to go back to WS policy and say i18n core is fine with the pocliy drafts (DONE) [4]

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/23-i18ncore-irc#T15-06-34

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Felix to go back to xml schema saying we will have IRI xml schema tests as part of the IRI test suite, no need to have them within the xml schema conformance test suite (DONE) [5]

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/23-i18ncore-irc#T15-07-03

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Francois to reread Martins mail and to write a reply to him (PENDING) [6]

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/23-i18ncore-irc#T15-07-31

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Richard to go back to PLS folks (DONE) [7]

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/23-i18ncore-irc#T15-07-52

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: all to give feedback on LTLI update (PENDING) [8]

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/23-i18ncore-irc#T15-08-53

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Felix to write a mail about possibility for SVG tiny specific IRI tests to martin and the i18n core list (PENDING) [9]

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/23-i18ncore-irc#T15-09-17

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Francois to build a current issues list on charmod norm (PENDING) [10]

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/23-i18ncore-irc#T15-09-40

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Francois to have a look at issue 3698 and gather information on options for diacrictics in collations (PENDING) [11]

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/23-i18ncore-irc#T15-10-01

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Michael to do the IDN work update (DONE) [12]

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/23-i18ncore-irc#T15-10-59

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Francois to draft s.t. for a note about C064 / C065 [13]

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/23-i18ncore-irc#T15-24-19

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Ienup to go to the Unicode UTC and check the stability of the "latest version" URI for referencing Unicode [14]

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/23-i18ncore-irc#T15-33-57

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Felix to go back to VBWG asking about our CCXML comments [15]

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/23-i18ncore-irc#T15-36-10

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Felix to go back to xml core with our comments on c14n [16]

16:32:22 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/23-i18ncore-irc#T16-02-34

16:32:24 [fsasaki]

fsasaki has left #i18ncore