MultilingualWeb-LT Working Group Teleconference

21 Jun 2012

See also: IRC log


Des, Dominic, Jirka, Olaf-Michael, tadej, Shaun, thomas, davidF, Felix, moritz, daveL


<trackbot> Date: 21 June 2012

<scribe> scribe: DomJones

reoccurring weekly GoToMeeting details: 1. Please join my meeting. https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/682416317 2. Use your microphone and speakers (VoIP) - a headset is recommended. Or, call in using your telephone. France: +33 (0) 182 880 932 Germany: +49 (0) 811 8899 6930 Ireland: +353 (0) 19 036 185 United States: +1 (626) 521-0015 Access Code: 682-416-317 Audio PIN: Shown after joining the meeting


<daveL> agenda on mail server; http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Jun/0097.html

<daveL> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Jun/0097.html

daveL: Agenda has been posted to IRC, has anybody got an additional agenda actions?

dF: No separate topic but as part of meeting wrap-up need to make sure recorded actions at meeting match current DB

workshop wrapup

Jirka: I have to leave early so action items to do with me need to be scheduled earlier.

daveL: Thanks for attendance, good event, interactive on LOD and reqs / WG day. Putting up slides is a WIP as is the videos.

arle: Video materials have been handed over.
... aim to be finished by early next week.

dF: Do you have my latest slides arle?

<mlefranc> regrets for telco

<mlefranc> Hi all,

arle: I have slides from you, not sure if the latest or not.

<mlefranc> I can't attend the telco today,

<mlefranc> I'll have a look on the minutes to see what's been said on actions and issues I'm related to,

<mlefranc> See last emails I sent,

<mlefranc> Tadej may also report part of what we discussed about,

<mlefranc> We have a formalism for global rules and local annotations, SPARQL rule-based procedures to compute the local annotations,

<mlefranc> But conceptualization issues with NIF, Strings and/or DOM (see mails)

<mlefranc> more in upcoming mails.

Des: Would like to say thanks to you and team for organising last week, went very well smoothly, allround cudos.

daveL: Good feedback and we'll reflect on as to whether we have another open event next year or not.

dF: Want to say we are not using GTMeeting chat window.
... we use IRC chat window instead.
... olaf looking for agenda.

<daveL> agenda link https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/agenda

daveL: re-posting agenda here

<daveL> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Jun/0097.html

daveL: Actions not aligning up to the agenda.

<scribe> ACTION: arle to check that all actions were recorded during the meeting last week [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/21-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-140 - Check that all actions were recorded during the meeting last week [on Arle Lommel - due 2012-06-28].

dF: not all actions were created in the db
... 109 and 126 both say the same thing "proposal for MT confidence"
... maybe for daveL
... I was volunteering for two other things that were not recorded.

des: I was given an action which was not recorded.

DomJones: problems with IRC on the day

dF: Started working on the second half of second day

daveL: arle has access to all the IRC logs

dF: Actions can be manually created in the issue tracker and associated with the anchor in the minutes.

arle: yes i can confirm actions on the second day were not logged officially, I will manually scavenge those.

daveL: People need to look at their actions and make sure they are correctly assigned.

arle: may take a few days to do this

daveL: Also we had some whiteboard notes from first day which I need to work through. Also session chairs to provide a short summary for all actions and a summary of one or two sentences

<daveL> http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/WS5_Preliminary_Presentations

daveL: a webpage where slides are being collected
... have added subsections
... could all chairs help to summerise the whole thing.

dF: Can you put up a link where Im suppose to summerise the session

daveL: Yes, just done this on IRC
... has all the sessions in order
... you can add bullet points. Done with all other MLW workshops, gives a good overview / take home points.
... Anything else in terms of wrapping up the Work Shop?
... no.

ITS2.0 standard drafting process and time line

daveL: plans for ITS2.0 standard. At the end of req gathering process, a bit late in terms of charter. SHould have had 1st draft out in May, were not too worried as requirements doc has tech details in however need to formally release 1st draft. Been sent out onto the list.
... how are we planning to do this? In ITS 1.0 used ODD (XML) One document does it all
... just looking at it now, not like a wiki but has good adv in terms of generating XML and schema
... propose a core of people work on that document adding to the ODD document.

<dF> Can you post the links for record?

daveL: Felix, Jirka, Arle, DaveL
... and a few others.

<dF> I mean the current draft and the XML editting environment :-)

<daveL> http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/TD.html

<fsasaki> draft is here http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html

<fsasaki> ODD file is here http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.odd

daveL: ODD is designed for litteral specification of XML schema. If you want to look at it in the raw form

<daveL> http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.odd

<fsasaki> readme for editing is here http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/README.txt

daveL: its not that complicated but you have to pay attention to detail
... felix has pointed us to the current draft of ITS2.0 generated from ODD

<dF> Thanks for posting those, Felix :-)

<fsasaki> np :)

daveL: To be that we need raw input from people with people in charge of specific data cats.
... take from ITS1.0 text which is being refactored as 2.0 text
... propose that a core group of editors deal with the ODD but the group provides the raw data. This raw data will be collated at a wiki page. People can update / re-shape / add examples / tightly worded definitions and when consensus is aggreed
... these will be updated in ODD document.
... come up with a series of checkpoints for this.
... draft based on what we currently have and then hard deadline at the end of Nov
... Is that clear to people and are people happy with this approach?
... Push on with that - will copy current req doc.
... req doc works well in terms of moving forward but does not have good descriptions of use-cases.
... will extract use-cases and further develop.
... makes the standard accessible and justify where data cats are there.
... if all are happy we'll move onto issues part of agenda

<fsasaki> daveL, just in case you don't plan it anway - all, please also let people know that they still need to write "call for consensus" mails about data categories, see http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Implementation_Commitments

<fsasaki> it won't work to just move all data categories from the req document to a new wiki page - we first need to make a pre-selection (IMO).

daveL: At felix what were asking for all current data cat discussions need to aim for a call for consensus

<fsasaki> great, thanks

daveL: cant move all data categories
... List of current commitments - all of ITS 1.0 and 2.0 where we think there is enough consesus, these will be moved over.
... others need to be driven by the group addressing outstanding issues and implementation commitments.

<fsasaki> daveL, all - are you happy to publish the current draft at http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html as a first public working draft? If you ask the people on the call I can already move forward with publication preparation. I just need a confirmation on IRC

daveL: Are we happy for the current spec, shared in the IRC to be published?

<fsasaki> link to spec at http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html

daveL: felix has sent this out a few days ago, contains re-worked 1.0 text and core set of data cats, new ones without details.
... seems to give a pointer back to req doc at this stage. I personally have no problem with this being published, others?

dF: link to commitments its not clear to me how to record a commitment.

<omstefanov> I got knocked out of gotomeeting. Tried reconnecting... pending. does someone need to let me in?

dF: there are no commitments for ITS 1.0 categories.

daveL: Names are people who have taken responc for driving consensus, others have been discussed but left hanging.

<fsasaki> dF, we have implementations from ITS 1.0 - we don't need commitments for them (although they are of course helpful to foster adoption).

daveL: need to ask people if there happy with that
... other req is the impl commitment. Need to flesh out whether those are real or some are "likeable"

<omstefanov> Still says, waiting for Organizer... please let me back in!

daveL: havent figured out best way to assess this yet.

des: very little in terms of translation domain commitements here. Im confused as to what is being listed here

<dF> Olaf seems to have connection issues..

daveL: I can't give an answer on this, felix brought list together as to where impl comitements exist.
... no call for consensus on email list.
... Wiki page with all categories and colum with why some are in and some are out. For example no call for consensus or not enough implm comitments

<scribe> ACTION: daveL table in a staging wiki page to notify current state of all data categories in terms of consensus and impl comitments. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/21-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-141 - Table in a staging wiki page to notify current state of all data categories in terms of consensus and impl comitments. [on David Lewis - due 2012-06-28].

daveL: @dF on ITS 1.0 -

dF: no point is page is call "Implementation commitments" and no way to record this, is it an error or should it be added? I feel your table addresses this.

<daveL> https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/agenda

<Arle> Note: I checked the actions in the IRC for June 12 and we actually are *not* missing any from that day. They were just sorted differently than I expected. But there were 11 actions in the raw IRC log and 11 listed as added in the minutes. All appear to be in the tracker too. I'll check for the 13th.

daveL: great, back to issues.

arle: For the 12th we are not missing any or the 11th, but am still checking for the 13th

daveL: Ok, need people to post mis-allocated actions to the list
... Start on issue 3 and then issue 25, Tadej on issue 3

tadej: On issue 3 on schema, no new movements on this. So I think its in the same place and makes no big difference either way

daveL: raises the issue of what would you call for consensus on?

tadej: 2 weeks ago on recommending ?NERD? for easier alignement and external referencing of ??
... will be down to recommending best practices that people should use NERD for entity types

daveL: Came up alot in WShop when we have an external pointer.

<fsasaki> daveL, no need to do this now during the discussion, but please ask before the end of the call again if publication of the draft is OK or not. If not, people should send their concerns *today* to the list, see my mail at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Jun/0071.html . I need a clear record of (dis)agreement, either way. Thanks and sorry for the noise again

daveL: external entities from ontologies are they ISOCAT or just pointers / selectors providing users as to how to do that.

tadej: two types of entity respositorys - I will open call for consensus on this.

DomJones: rasises issues of publication of draft to Dave

daveL: No one objected so I think we are ok to publish. Nothing specific about new ones.

<fsasaki> Great, thanks a lot. I'll give myself an action item to prepare publication

DomJones: publication of draft is minuted as being agreed upon

<scribe> ACTION: fsasaki to prepare publication of draft [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/21-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-142 - Prepare publication of draft [on Felix Sasaki - due 2012-06-28].

daveL: On issue three continue as you are, in terms of issue 25? That really came out of the Dublin meeting. Any progress of htat?

tadej: Did nothing in terms of aligning to external ontologies. Worked more on exporting stuff to RDF, Maxime sent ides on mailing list. Exporting to RDF is possible, RDFa is more difficult
... several recipies for this depedning on global rules and consumption of data. Maxime is watiing for comments on design choices here. Any suggestions?

daveL: General feeling is that loc people are not clear on use-cases for mapping entities into RDF, this came out in the Dublin meeting.
... Maxime and others are breaking new ground but not sure where the use-case exists and is clear.
... Are we going to change the terminology specification for ITS 1.0. My mind is open on that.

tadej: There are concerns or contraints reply to Maximes email.
... I would recommend we send mroe examples to the list on how things could be represented.
... follow up on this.

daveL: @jirka we have drifted into issue 24 to summerise usage of Ruby in docbook

Jirka: going to summerise this via email today or tomorrow

Cant hear Jirka

Jirka: I will summerise via email and close action item.

daveL: Issue 22 on provenance - whether we should be consolidating topics around agent.
... Not looking at stand-off provenance should not stop us from in-line markup
... make some assumptions about translation / revision agents, simular for author.
... comes down to whether we consolidate or not? Not a great idea where more than one element is operated upon.
... I will post an email on this.
... On action 132
... not sure felix has checked, I have been in touch with provenance wg, not sure if felix has got a different view from the w3c which is positive, send a call as consensus for provenance as a stand off mark-up
... Any comments?
... Next issue is ?? for Moritz

mhellwig: no one got back to me on this

daveL: mortiz, could you summerise this?

<fsasaki> davdL, I have no further information about provenance WG - do you want to give me an action item to follow up?

I lost audio there

daveL: Do we explicitly mark something to be removed or do we name things in such a way we can strip out everything? We can but do we do this selectively

mhellwig: Hard to formalise in a way that can be documented in req docs. Not seen as too big of an issue. If we get something we dont understand how can it be kept in there

des: its the expectation problem
... should be some informative text about what categories behave in what way

daveL: one thing that occurred to me in terms of processes --- arle's google spreadsheet was informative where it would be created, passed through and consumed. Only informative.
... non-normative. If we do continue are there processes where we delete of aim to delete a class of data category.

dF: Archiving is not a feature in terms of our definition.
... Archiving is not a data-category. For specific categories should have processing requirements. For example the error profiles for reporting of errors is important but if you are publishing html output of CMS could have in processing requirements that certain sections are stripped.

<Arle> I can't stay today. I need to leave. Please let me know if you assign me any actions.

dF: each owner of the data category should list if a data cat should be persistant or not. Eng source txt as transalte yes, -> German nothing changes and its no harm

daveL: interesting example as translate is whether to translate or not, not whether it has been translated.
... You could still have the translate tag in the translated text

dF: translate tag means its is translatable not a technical thing
... semantics does not change
... what is in this place in translatable no-matter what.

daveL: re-asserting that the german (from english) is furthur transalteable

dF: Related disucssion on transalted inline in XLIFF.

daveL: decision may change based on language.

dF: Translate = boolean.
... wont break technical functionality of page
... I would not make blanket decision for all categories.
... should think about lifecycle of categories.
... QA is a difficult example of this

des: need to communicate this in a standard form.

daveL: have to draw a close, reply to Moritz's mail please
... AOB?
... Remind all to pick up on their sessions, drive discussion and we'll pick these up at the next meeting.

<omstefanov> David Filip indicated that he could add an Austrian phone number to the GoToMeetings he runs, but asked me to ask the others to do the same. That's what I'm now doing. Please include Austria in list for future calls.

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: arle to check that all actions were recorded during the meeting last week [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/21-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: daveL table in a staging wiki page to notify current state of all data categories in terms of consensus and impl comitments. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/21-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: fsasaki to prepare publication of draft [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/21-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action03]
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.136 (CVS log)
$Date: 2012/06/26 23:28:04 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.136  of Date: 2011/05/12 12:01:43  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Found Scribe: DomJones
Inferring ScribeNick: DomJones
Present: Des Dominic Jirka Olaf-Michael tadej Shaun thomas davidF Felix moritz daveL
Found Date: 21 Jun 2012
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2012/06/21-mlw-lt-minutes.html
People with action items: arle davel fsasaki

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]