See also: IRC log
<fsasaki> checking attendees ...
<fsasaki> scribe: dF
fsasaki: comments on agenda?
fsasaki: no comments on agenda
... announcement through linkedIn dicussed
... but we now prefer direct contact
... it is importnat to get feedback from the right people to specific sections
... DFKI is tracking the call for reviews
... e.g. mtConfidence by MT people
... It is very bad if you get many hundreds of comments
... but it is also bad to get only a few dozen. This might indicate to the w3c mgmt that the public is not interested
daveL: reaching out to specific
people and also re implementation interest
... the goal is to get feedback re usability
fsasaski: Those are good points: implementations and usability
daveL: Do we have some wording for the public announcement?
daveL: technical people might be busy, but if they bosses see the announcement, it might help drive the reviews
fsasaki: I posted link to announcement for tech audience, but can be tweaked
<omstefanov> I can distribute it to JIAMCATT, but please, you guys, share your texts with me/us.
<scribe> ACTION: dF to tweak the text for business audience [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/12/10-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-363 - Tweak the text for business audience [on David Filip - due 2012-12-17].
<fsasaki> ACTION: arle to nudge serge to send text about last call announcement to arle [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/12/10-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-364 - Nudge serge to send text about last call announcement to arle [on Arle Lommel - due 2012-12-17].
fsasaki: another outreach effort
... localization professionals group on linkedIn
Arle: we do not want to confuse
... this week we should post on the mlw workshop in March
... next week for public review
Serge: I would have it the other way round, since there is plenty of time till March
Felix: This is important to announce before xmas break to boost speakers
Conclusion was that this week there will be the ITS 2.0 last call announcement on linkedin, and next week the March workshop announcement.
fsasaki: People need to be aware
of the comment answering process, it is a painful process but
... se the wiki page on the posted link
... the whole WG is automatically on the comment list.
fsasaki: everyone who is not yet
formally on the WG should subscribe to the comments list
... Every comment receives a new Issue on the tracker, same as we were tracking the issues bfeore LC
... we now need to be very careful to have track record on changes
daveL: Do we really have distinct issue for every comment, or can we group?
fsasaki: the baseline is that we
need to document resolutions along with comment submitter
... there is no rule on grouping, but it may be as well easier to track them individually even if similar
daveL: What if they are distracted and do not reply back after we've made changes
fsasaki: again no clear rule..
fsasaki: but if they do not come
back within a reasonable timeframe we are OK with documenting
that we've tried to get the response
... The tracker handling link (see above) is mainly for co-chairs, as we need to keep track of the comments, can add notes, kewords
... to keep track
fsasaki: the keywords in the wiki are important for disposition of comments
fsasaki: using this keywords we
create a DB dump that is displayed via an XSLT
... this is just an example, as we did not have LC comments yet, this is just to show how the keywords work
... I am going to update this style sheet so that it reflects the LC
... we have two WG commnets from Yves
... we might find time to cover them today
... at the end of LC we will have a document with all comments resolved, accepted or rejected and all changes editorial, NOT substantial
... it is important to be structured and keep track of the issue #
daveL: substantive change would require new LC?
fsasaki: yes, it would mean at
least 3 week delay, and we do need to wait to the end of the
first last call and dicpose of all commnets before issuing a
... it actually would not save time, to jump to new LC before disposing of ALL comments from the previous LC
fsasaki: In LC we mean that
normative sections are stable
... but sections 1 and 2 are not stable
... Christian sent comments to co-editors
... explanatory material also needs to be right
<fsasaki> * edit together. in various online editing calls.
fsasaki: we need to decide on plan for editong these explanatory sections with Christian's comments
<fsasaki> * find heros who can go through the sections and send the outcome to the group
fsasaki: editing together works
well, but takes a lot of time of many people..
... wee need volunteer heroes who first edit off line
daveL: we need volunteers to look
at the content along with Christian's comments in advance of an
... I'd be happy to take a few, but not before xmas
Phil: I'd take the quality sections
fsasaki: these are not under
... could someone start the work before xmas?
<fsasaki> "sections 1-2"
Naoto: are we talking
introduction and basic concepts?
... I read through it today, I found typos
fsasaki: can you send the typos?
<scribe> ACTION: Naoto: to compile comments on sections 1 and 2 along with Christians comments and to send to comment list [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/12/10-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-366 - Compile comments on sections 1 and 2 along with Christians comments and to send to comment list [on Naoto Nishio - due 2012-12-17].
<scribe> ACTION: Felix to look into Naoto's edits and other fedback from Aron with Opera [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/12/10-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action06]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-367 - Look into Naoto's edits and other fedback from Aron with Opera [on Felix Sasaki - due 2012-12-17].
Christian: Whatever creates less noice, happy to resolve with co-editors
fsasaki: I propose to move the
above till the end of the year
... everybody OK with that?
Phil: This makes sense
fsasaki: I created a wiki page re testing
fsasaki: Olaf had input on that,
... this is autogenerated
... the wiki markup is bad..
the baseline it is a table of MUST and MUST NOT statements
scribe: each has a separate
... column 4 is importnat
... data category owners need to provide tests
... most of the statements are covered with testsuite or schema
... some are not, we need a good stror for them
... we need to explain how to verify these..
... it is not always possible to have a test in the current test suite framework.
... There should be always a good story, why something is not tested
Olaf: you saw from my e-mail that
about quarter is identical
... I see now that it is because of being auto-generated..
... pruning down would ease going trough it
fsasaki: we are looking for
somebody to do the testing for each row
... but testing might not be always required
... feedback on quality from Daniel
... generated many MUST statements that are hard to test in a machine readable way
... still there is a way how to verify, e.g. have examples for human judgement
... is this answer OK?
Olaf: I understand
<scribe> ACTION: felix to downsize the table [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/12/10-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action09]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-370 - Downsize the table [on Felix Sasaki - due 2012-12-17].
fsasaki: looking for volunteers to address rows
<Arle> Arle for quality rows
fsasaki: please type your name in IRC aginst data categories
<scribe> ACTION: Arle to dispose of quality related rows in the table [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/12/10-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action10]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-371 - Dispose of quality related rows in the table [on Arle Lommel - due 2012-12-17].
Phil: still unclear, would we provide example files?
fsasaki: Eve with example files,
the machine test might not be possible..
... how could a machine decide if something is e.g. semantically acurate
... we can define test for human testers
... is it clear?
Phil: It is
... Lot of quality related rows, is that a generation issues?
fsasaki: This is due to automatic generation, not very useful in the current state..
<philr> I will take a look at the 5 or 6 loc quality related ones.
<scribe> ACTION: Phil to dispose of quality issues related ones [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/12/10-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action11]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-372 - Dispose of quality issues related ones [on Phil Ritchie - due 2012-12-17].
daveL: we probaly have the
positive statements covered by the test suite
... we probably also need to go through the negative
fsasaki: various areas, e.g. ITS
to XLIFF mapping
... se the posted link..
... BP are not mandatory
... they need manpower
... if someone needs editing set up, please contact co-chairs
Arle: I will work on quality
fsasaki: quality is not yet on the list
Arle: I need to work on it anything for QT launchpad, so thet group gets it for free..
<Clemens> Felix, I've to go... is there something you need me for, now?
fsasaki: The WG is not just
... it is a time consuming process
... even though not nornmative it needs to be drafted, reviewed and OKed by the group
daveL: I agree we do not try and
revive the requirements document
... we should adress high level use cases
... I'd look into provenance..
... Another worthu topic would be integration of text analytics into MT
fsasaki: this is the latest state
of testing commitments
... thanks for testing webinar to Dom and leroy
... next milestone is Dec 17
... Does any one have issue with the next week milestone?
... The alternatives are one category completely
Phill: We are in good shape
<Fredrik> Fredrik: It's ok with Enlaso
fsasaki: Please report if you have issue with the milestone
Olaf: Does it mean to get to all gree by next week?
fsasaki: no, we have
... implementation plan is not about the colours at this stage, but about meeting the milestones as sepcified above the table
... we want conformant tests, but now it is about making progress
... Other items we can address next week
fsasaki: Arle posted a
... now looking into action items
... feedback for annual report
... many are due today
... does that work for everyone?
Phil: I sent a Google doc last week
fsasaki: it is not important to have loads of stuff, one or two paragraphs is OK
Arle: no template
... just vanila html
fsasaki: Arle, can you post the link again?
Des: due date?
Arle: nothing specifically from
you, unless you really want to..
... this is for section leaders
... in the LT-Web
I can do it by Wed COB
... next week we will continue LC comments and Christian commnets to non-nomative stuff