See also: IRC log
<YvesS> present YvesS+
form Cs filled in, the m24 report "your parts" to send to me
felix: by end of next week
... felix will send document around again
<YvesS> Yes, sending the doc again will help. Thanks
26 February, 1/2 day prep meeting 25 Feb, in Lux
start 25 noon
no schedule page yet
<scribe> ACTION: felix to prepare a review schedule page [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/01/08-i18nits-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-35 - Prepare a review schedule page [on Felix Sasaki - due 2014-01-15].
felix: arrvie 25 by noon, leave 26 after 5 pm
<YvesS> I think it looks fine. It's short, to the point and not too techincal. just what an average localizer would need.
<philr> Can you give me until 24/1?
felix: do some social media buzz?
<philr> Happy to tweet once ready.
pedro: template is nice for
publishing in the web
... but publishing this in a magazine is not readable
... because the example is not readable
... works well for online
<YvesS> actually a concrete very short example would help.
<YvesS> local example sounds good
<scribe> ACTION: felix to add a short local example to the template [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/01/08-i18nits-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-36 - Add a short local example to the template [on Felix Sasaki - due 2014-01-15].
pedro: something very concrete, understandable, for non-technical people
felix: more work needed on this?
pedro: apart from readiness we
discussed standard web service, that is for future
... for readiness we are planning for CMS <> TMS solutions, as an option for clients
... we suggest an improvement to include ITS, and the readiness extension
<chriLi> The "readiness" discussion always reminded me of standard BPMN activity states such as init, ready, running ,terminated, skipped.
pedro: for the real time
publishing system we are going to use the ITS and
... because it allows to use it for intelligence: what needs to be post edited, what not etc.
... for this we are thinking of readiness to be a key feature to provide clients more control whith concrete content
<chriLi> The overall model in BPMN is quite comprehensive. It does for example have rules for "state transitions".
<chriLi> BPMN = Business Process Model and Notation
<dF> I am using BPMN for my papers
<dF> It is readable by business audience
<dF> and at the same time it constraints what can be drawn in a meaningful way
pedro: we discussed convinience
of coordinating with linport
... and with process ontology that linked data people mentioned
<dF> I am happy to draw the diagram if I am provided with the process description
pedro: in the linked data group
people create ontologies for processes as well
... somebody should look at bpmn
... structure of readiness is fine, simple, goes to the point
david: like the idea of drawing a
... helps to test if this is a sound process
pedro: could we invole linport and linked data people well?
<dF> I can also make a petri nets representation :-)
christian: two discussions now:
relate readiness towards bpmn (=standards based)
... then relating harmonization of state related discussions in the localization system (linport, XLIFF, ITS)
<dF> I agree with Cristian
christian: that is a separate stream. There are always two choices: you agree about one thing, or you make clear what is used by whom
david: important - these are
... one is readiness in ITS - the other discussions with linport and others
... XLIFF had some attributes that could have been used for readiness, but the XLIFF TC has decided to kill the process description
... I am more interested to draw the diagrams
pedro: in London, ASLIB
conference - Alan Melby distributed a paper with defintion of
localization process - I'll check if this is published
... only thing: if we describe the process as a best practice, that is good theoretically
... the client cannot use a reference to process steps
... I am a bit afraid of making this too ridig
... for example, in the scenario I mentioned, there is an example that a client wants post editing, other clients don't
... in that case the client will use only one process - post-edit QA
... not a whole sequential process
... this is compatible with the diagram David mentioned, right?
david: yes, agree
pedro: important to agree on
... if we have a diagram it is like an automat: you can select certain steps, not one piece
david: I will talk to pedro if things are unclear
<scribe> ACTION: david to work with pedro on drawing bpmn diagram by next call (also take the EU MOLTO project into account) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/01/08-i18nits-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> 'david' is an ambiguous username. Please try a different identifier, such as family name or username (e.g., dfilip, dlewis6).
<chriLi> Aarne Ranta
<scribe> ACTION: dfilip to work with pedro on drawing bpmn diagram by next call (also take the EU MOLTO project into account) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/01/08-i18nits-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-37 - Work with pedro on drawing bpmn diagram by next call (also take the eu molto project into account) [on David Filip - due 2014-01-15].
david: need to discuss ITS track
or its successor very soon
... june 3-4, in Dublin
<Ankit> +1 to participation
<dF> Do we wnat to have ITS track?
<dF> or a cuccessor?
felix: make sure to decide this
by monday next week
... will send a separate mail
david: XLIFF mapping is a topic,
2.0 is close to be completet, so mapping will be relevant
... if ITS is not so hot that it fills its own track that is OK - just want to see what the interest is
... or if we want to push it more into other areas - RDF, other mappings, CMIS, ...
christian: about FEISGILTT:
... so far you organized this with different tracks - a nice way of doing things, but sometimes communities can't meet in that way
... things need to play together
... not sure if separate tracks help with that
david: there are some special
issues that are only subgroups are interested in
... 2nd day was always federated
jirka: xml prague, felix will
have ITS presentation in main program
... doing pre-conference day there will be session and publishing
david: I submitted a proposal
same for felix
jirka: leaflet for XML prague would work too
<chriLi> I have to leave ...
jirka: for proceedings I'd need the leaflet 1 week before conference
felix: I'll talk to Arle
david: most important issues are
... public review will be published 21st of January
... we introduced fragment identification
felix: public review will allow comments from the outside right?
david: will be open for 15 days
<YvesS> Yes, the changes are done
<YvesS> they just need to be published
<dF> I need to run
<dF> Cheers everyone
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.138 of Date: 2013-04-25 13:59:11 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/MLW WS/MLW WS and other outreach/ Succeeded: s/FEISSGILT/FEISGILTT/ Succeeded: s/separated/federated/ Succeeded: s/0/0 mapping/ No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: fsasaki Inferring Scribes: fsasaki Present: fsasaki pedro YvesS garylefman philr Ankit dF leroy christian Jirka Regrets: dave jörg pablo Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its-ig/2014Jan/0002.html Got date from IRC log name: 08 Jan 2014 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2014/01/08-i18nits-minutes.html People with action items: david dfilip felix[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]