Meeting minutes
<JohnRochford> Internationalization feedback: https://
Today is a joint meeting of Clear Language and Internationalization subgroups
Rachael: Proposed picking a specific set of languages that we will do conditional tests for as we develop WCAG 3 standards
Rachael: Also proposed writing guidance for translators when they translate guidance. Example: diacritics is needed for Arabic, but not for all languages.
<lisa> w3c/
Rachael: Hoping that process can acknowledge the need for internationalization without needing to cover all languages at once
Lisa: I can't imagine Internationalization will agree to picking 5 languages. We can ask them but I don't think there's much point in designing for 5 languages if they're not OK with it.
Lisa: Historically, we tried to make 'Making Content Usable' as international as possible. We tried to generalize. We could have examples in a variety of languages.
Lisa: We should have made voice/tense more inclusive so it worked for Japanese.
Lisa: We found out there are a lot of internationalization groups in the W3C. We can approach those different communities and try to get guidance for as many languages as possible.
Lisa: But we can also broaden or make exceptions of clauses for certain languages.
Lisa: We could maintain a wiki that is relatively easy to change, with links to local plain language providers in different languages.
Lisa: We should bounce plan off of Internationalization and see if they're happy with it. Five languages is not likely to be enough. A wiki might help.
John R: Regarding practical limitations, there is no possible way that the Internationalization group can say that we have to address every language.
John R: I like Rachael's thinking about a methodology to perhaps address 5 languages and then have approach to add more languages.
<Zakim> lisa, you wanted to ask if we have some time for tpac and to and to
John R: Plain language is my area of expertise. Not a lot of plain language efforts in a lot of languages. Our approach will be pioneering across the world.
<Rachael> +1 to buy in from internationalization
Jeanne: I like Lisa's idea that we should get buy-in from different internationalization groups so we have something to say to the main Internationalization group.
<Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to ask how ISO standard handles internationalization?
John R: During the AGWG call, I said we're piloting with English. If we get something done with English first, then we can move to other languages. I don't know why that isn't sufficient.
Jeanne: I wanted to ask about the ISO standard for plain language. How did the ISO spec address internationalization?
<kirkwood> +1 to Lisa approach in for internationalization
Scribe <julierawe>
John R: The Library of Congress will not have the new ISO. The only way to access the ISO is to buy it.
Lisa: I'm sure one of our members like Google has bought it.
Jeanne: I think we should look at how ISO handled it so we can share that approach with Internationalization.
<kirkwood> This is how we handled it in NYC gov’t https://
Jeanne: We need answers that will stop the arguments.
Lisa: You are not allowed to publish without Internationalization's acceptance.
Lisa: We've got to get their buy-in.
<kirkwood> +1 to Lisa on strategy for buy in
<kirkwood> remember that well!
Lisa: We tried to make Making Content Usable and thought we'd addressed the issue, but they had reopened it and said it was not adequately addressed.
Rachael: We've published our first working draft. Right now Internationalization can't block this early in the process.
Rachael: Proactively engaging Internationalizaition is good approach. Getting in conversation with them now is really important.
<Zakim> lisa, you wanted to say apa has a meeting with atnationalization
Rachael: We need to coordinate with Internationalization but we don't need to stop working now.
Lisa: We have an opportunity at TPAC to meet with Internationalization on Tuesday.
<lisa> Internationalization Confirmed: Tuesday 1130-1200, in APA space
Lisa: I could call into that or anyone else who wants to join me.
<Rachael> +1 to introducing the idea and scheduling a future meeting that is dedicated to this conversation
Lisa: According to Janina, they don't have a lot on their agenda so maybe we could bring up the idea of 5 languages
John R: I'll participate in that meeting. I'll go. I'm volunteering to be the point person to negotiate with them.
<kirkwood> Feel that internationalization does not go far enough for us COGA I think our topic should include localization: https://
Lisa: We've got Katy on the call too.
<KatyB> +1 to John R being present in the room and putting forward our ideas to Intl
<Rachael> +1 to letting Janina and Matthew know to add to agenda
<Rachael> Expected process that might take months: 1) proposal 2) joint meeting with COGA and Internationalization 3) They need to circulate across their members which seems to take 4-8 weeks 4) follow up joint meeting
<jeanne> +1 to Julie's suggestion of getting some buy-in from I17n
Julie: I will make a couple slides to share during the Internationalization meeting on Tuesday
Rachael: Even just putting forward a plan could do a lot
<Rachael> +1
Lisa: Just having a plan is really useful from AG perspective and make your comments
<KatyB> I would think 5 is enough to test our approach to adapting our work in other languages. E.g. Chinese, Spanish, Arabic, German, Russian.
Rachael: We need enough languages that are different enough. But we can't do everything. What's enough? Is it 3? Is it 10?
Rachael: Based on that, we can write a guideline
<KatyB> +1 to languages that are different enough. Let's ask Intl if they would be happy with this range and justify why we have included these languages.
Rachael: I think opening that conversation early is a good idea. That's all we need right now.
Lisa: When can I get the information from Julie and Katy about proposals and resources so we can share on Tuesdays?
Julie: I can send draft tomorrow
John K: I have a lot of resources around internationalization and localization. Good opportunity for us to look at the experiences of large companies.
<Rachael> Regarding ISO Plain Language, none of the Libraries I can get access to have purchased it yet but its so new that isn't suprising. I can likely get it later this year.
<KatyB> +1 to John's comment. I have been compiling a list of easy language experts in diff languages. I would be happy to reach out to them when we have agreed our approach.
Lisa: This is an opportunity. Venn diagram of cognitive disabilities and localization. We can be empowering each other.
<KatyB> +1 to Julie's slides ideas. A good opportunity for initial feedback.
Julie: I suggest 3 or so slides to help focus the conversation. Rachael 5-language approach; Lisa alternative/augmented approach with wiki; kinds of groups we'll engage—W3C language groups, large companies, etc.
Jeanne: And include ISO
Lisa: Which languages?
<kirkwood> Shouldn’t we just use those?
Jeanne: We could pick the 4 official languages of the W3C (based on host countries): English, French, Chinese and Japanese.
Lisa: Maybe we need a method that is "Use local language advice" and maintain a wiki with local advice.
<jeanne2> Six languages of the UN
<lisa> https://
Julie: I worry that a local language method might undo all the rest of our guidelines. We want to enhance, not let it be an excuse not to do other things.
<lisa> https://
<Rachael> I will continue to try to track down ISO
Oops, the above comment was from Lisa not me
<lisa> nternationalization Confirmed: Tuesday 1130-1200, in APA space Status: scheduled—but need to confirm location (2023-08-24) Duration: 30min Interlinear text synchronisation for accessible user agents (we know of some obvious synchronisation issues, such as different writing directions/systems). i18n blue sky projects.
Jeanne: It will be hard to get additional time at TPAC with APA
Rachael: I recommend you coordinate with Janina and Matthew and ask about getting time.
<kirkwood> BTW NYC law the 10 mandated languages: Spanish, Chinese, Russian, Bengali, Haitian-Creole, Korean, Arabic, Urdu, French, and Polish. https://
Rachael: John R, maybe you can also get a coffee with them.
Lisa: I'll try to get an introduction with them.
Rachael: I'm happy to reach out about a meeting after TPAC
Rachael: I will wait to hear back from Lisa before I do any outreach.
Lisa: We want John K at the meeting on findability
Rachael: TPAC is a little different this year.
Rachael: We have groups that are following North American time, and COGA is one of those groups.
Rachael: Registration will reopen on Monday.
Rachael: Looking through the North American groups which run from 9:30 am to 5 pm ET:
Rachael: Text uses semantics
Rachael: Cognitive load is on European time
Rachael: Programmatically ordered is on North American time
Rachael: Website provides help --would be great if John K could join
Rachael: The website does not cause harm is on Friday
Rachael: Website aids navigation will likely be moved out of TPAC
<Rachael> https://
Rachael: Send me an email about which group you want to join.
Lisa: Should we use the coga IRC channel to help if people get stuck, especially on Monday during registration? Finding the right meeting room?
Rachael: I would love to have Lisa join the Monday meeting on user processes do not increase cognitive load
Rachael: If you're only coming for one day, you have to register but TPAC does have a one-day option
Lisa: I got the feeling it's fine for us to join the Tuesday Internationalization. I'll send email.