See also: IRC log
<fsasaki> agenda at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Apr/0177.html
<fsasaki> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-tests/2013Apr/0026.html
<fsasaki> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-tests/2013Apr/0030.html
<fsasaki> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-tests/2013Apr/0031.html
Felix: its:span is currently part of the schema. Jirka has explained why it is not good idea, Yves has explained why it is a good idea.
<Yves_> Never seen its:span used in real life either.
<Yves_> agree with Jirka on the example
Jirka: We could encorporate its:span in the schema, but so far it has been rarely used.
<Yves_> sure
Felix: OK to leave everything as is.
Felix: Partipants of the call accept to not change the status quo for its:span.
<fsasaki> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Apr/0162.html
<fsasaki> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Apr/0170.html
<Yves_> yes
<Yves_> no objection to close issue-67
Felix: Pablo and Yves are fine with the proposed change. Everyone else on the call is fine as well.
<fsasaki> close issue-67
<trackbot> Closed ISSUE-67 Change definition of regular expression for allowed characters.
<Yves_> sure
<fsasaki> ACTION: yves to make edit for issue-67 see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Apr/0170.html [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/04/24-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-496 - Make edit for issue-67 see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Apr/0170.html [on Yves Savourel - due 2013-05-01].
Felix: OK for Yves to do the edit for ISSUE-67.
Felix: General idea is to not hardwire regexp for allowed chars in schema.
<fsasaki> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Apr/0139.html
<Yves_> yes
Felix: Bottom line is "Definition
of HTML5 'translate' and "inline" still unstable but we want to
make people aware of its:translate. The idea is to cover HTML5
by means of a non-normative pointer (from a Wiki page)."
... Everyone fine to close issues related to HTML5 "translate"
and defaults?
<fsasaki> close issue-97
<trackbot> Closed ISSUE-97 Comment on ITS 2.0 specification WD - HTML translate.
<fsasaki> close-118
No objections in from the call. Felix volunteers to do the corresponding edit.
<fsasaki> ACTION: felix to do edits related to HTML defaults , see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Apr/0139.html [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/04/24-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-497 - Do edits related to HTML defaults , see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Apr/0139.html [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-05-01].
Felix: Wiki page that Karl created will be moved to ITS IG Wiki and pointer from spec to it will be created.
Felix: Waiting for response from I18N core. Status: Ruby removed from ITS 2.0
<fsasaki> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Apr/0087.html
<fsasaki> http://www.w3.org/International/its/wiki/Tool_specific_mappings
Felix: We have a need for a
number of mappings
... ITS2XLIFF, locQualityIssue, textAnalysis, ...
... What do people think? Are additional mappings
needed?
<fsasaki> ACTION: felix to install the mappings in the IG wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/04/24-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-498 - Install the mappings in the IG wiki [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-05-01].
Felix: Mappings will be stored in IG Wiki
<fsasaki> scribe: fsasaki
christian: when we looked at loc
quality issue
... we found the need to include version information
... related to tools that are mentioned in the mapping
... and we said we may benefit from one or two general
statements
... that clarify the relationship between native ITS2 support
and diverging values
... wonder if we should create a general preface for all
mappings
<scribe> scribe: chriLi
<fsasaki> http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#lqissue-typevalues
<fsasaki> "To foster interoperability, implementers are strongly encouraged not to rely on these mappings and to implement the ITS 2.0 quality types natively."
Felix: Mapping for LocQualityType page has been adapted.
<fsasaki> https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/actions/495
Felix: Arle will add version
information for the LocQualityType.
... Not sure if a general note would be adequate.
... translate, and textAnalysis may not lend themselves to be
covered natively by ITS
... mapping might be a better choice
... Example: using RDFa with Search Engines is better than
using ITS natively (due to the support of RDFa in Search
Engine)
ChriLi: OK not to have a general set of remarks for all mappings
<fsasaki> http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-charmod-norm-20120501/#sec-NormalizingTranscoder
Felix: Mini section expresses
guidance to use normalization forms
... based on feedback from I18N core
<fsasaki> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2013Apr/0021.html
<fsasaki> scribe: fsasaki
christian: wondering how far
normalization is addressed in XLIFF
... we want to ensure that we know how to go from ITS to
XLIFF
... or "via" ITS to XLIFF
... knowing in advance which normalization approaches are
recommended in both worlds would help
... heard that the XLIFF 2.0 spec will be sent out soon and
that it possibly addresses normalizationes normalization
... davidF may have been able to talk about this
<scribe> scribe: chriLi
Phil: David had an action item to draft a spec. David only provided an example.
<Yves_> Sorry: I have not followed the discussion about normalization in XLIFF 2.0. I think that discussion is related to some validation module.
Phil: unsure whether the example included something related to normalization.
<Yves_> sure
<pnietoca> Christian the one that was talking was Phil not me :)
Felix: Yves, could you take an action to check XLIFF 2.0 normalization?
<fsasaki> ACTION: yves to check normalization in XLIFF2 and see wehtehr it relates to ITS2 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/04/24-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-499 - Check normalization in XLIFF2 and see wehtehr it relates to ITS2 [on Yves Savourel - due 2013-05-01].
<pnietoca> but Phil is not on IRC just on the phone
<Yves_> not much changes so far
<Yves_> there are still a few data cat that need to be resolved
Felix: Yves, any thoughts on stability of the mapping?
Felix: Should the mapping discussion moved back to the mainstream WG discussion?
<Yves_> probably only XLIFF-related issues.
<Yves_> yes that should be enough
Felix: Dave was hoping to stabilize by Bled f2f
<Yves_> I hope the same
Felix: Stabilization of ITS2XILFF mapping by Bled f2f seems feasible
<fsasaki> http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/rdf#taIdentRef
<fsasaki> http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/rdf-content/its-rdf.rdf
Felix: Dave, Felix and Sebastian create RDF representation of ITS data categories
<fsasaki> http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/rdf#translate
Felix: Example: translate
<fsasaki> http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its/rdf-content/its-rdf.rdf
Felix: Link explains how ontology
can be using NIF context
... nothing normative either
... plan also to stabilize by Bled f2f
<fsasaki> scribe: fsasaki
christian: so far the ontology
itself or parts of it
... are these already part of the usage scenarios that have
been implemented?
<scribe> scribe: chriLi
Felix: So far no one has yet used
the ontology.
... Good idea to include something in the usage scenarios
... Sebastian is working on use in dbpedia spotlight
<fsasaki> scribe: fsasaki
<scribe> scribe: fsasaki
<scribe> ACTION: christian to take ITS ontology and NIF conversion into account for the next update of the usage scenarios document - due 2013-05-15 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/04/24-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-500 - take ITS ontology and NIF conversion into account for the next update of the usage scenarios document [on Christian Lieske - due 2013-05-15].
<scribe> scribe: chriLi
<fsasaki> http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/EventSchedule
Felix: Some dates and locations
still have to be fixed
... It might be a good idea to combine meetings with outreach
(for leveraging efforts)
... Please share possibilities for doing this.
Phil: I submitted a couple of papers (LocWorld, MT Summit) and have talked to a couple of customers. Planning to spread word in customer base.
Felix: We have promised big events in the project.
<Ankit> There is a Projects Village (part of MT Summit).. perhaps MLW-LT as a group can have a stand there?.. just a suggestion
<Ankit> http://www.mtsummit2013.info/projects_village.asp
Pedro: I thought Rome event was
big enough. Possibly we can have multiple smaller events rather
than an additional big one.
... We may want to think about the life for ITS 2.0 after the
rec has been published.
Felix: Of course, we will ensure
that we can consult, give guidance
... Possibly: Include pointers to Wiki, mailing lists in
presentations
Felix: Project partners already
discussed
... Pedro already made a proposal
... Are people eager to have a logo.
Phil: Good idea
Pedro: I can sent around the
proposal. However, we may want to have something that is not
tied to MLW.
... Possibly could be used on Web pages/sites to signal "ITS
enabled".