W3C

– DRAFT –
Internationalization Working Group Teleconference

09 March 2023

Attendees

Present
Addison, Atsushi, Bert, JcK, Richard, xfq_
Regrets
-
Chair
Addison Phillips
Scribe
addison, xfq_

Meeting minutes

<addison> trackbot, prepare teleconference

Agenda Review

Action Items

<addison> https://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/open

addison: i've been working on the explainer
… thanks r12a for the suggestion

r12a: glossary is in progress

xfq: ACTION-1248, still pending

<addison> w3c/i18n-glossary#22?

<ghurlbot> Issue 22 Items from lreq that could be added to Glossary (r12a)

r12a: ACTION-1251, in progress

Info Share

addison: DST change

https://beta.w3.org/

<addison> Fuqiao: w3c released a beta version of a new website

<addison> ... feedback is welcome

https://github.com/w3c/w3c-website/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Ainternationalization

<addison> ... a few i18n related issues tracked here ^^

JcK: maybe late next week

RADAR Review

https://github.com/w3c/i18n-request/projects/1

Bert: started reading css-text-3
… from top to bottom
… you have to read the text from top to bottom to understand

atsushi: WoT Profile in discussion
… can move it to Awaiting comment resolution

Group Meeting at TPAC

addison: TPAC 2023 will be held from 11 to 15 September 2023, with a main in-person hub in Sevilla, Spain.

r12a: I'd like to go, depending on the covid situation

Bert: would like to go

xfq_: would like to go, not 100% sure yet

atsushi: me too

addison: it seems we will have one to half a dozen participants

ACTION: addison: request physical meeting at tpac

<trackbot> Created ACTION-1252 - Request physical meeting at tpac [on Addison Phillips - due 2023-03-16].

SecurePaymentConfirmation update

addison: I had an interchange with Ian Jacobs about our open issue with them regarding their note in the text
… "we don't have metadata yet, see this issue"
… I made some text proposals to him
… additions to the i18n considerations section

https://github.com/w3c/secure-payment-confirmation/pull/232/files

addison: any thoughts?

xfq_: they talk about both localization and string metadata

addison: right
… and linked to qa-bidi-unicode-controls

Bert: maybe there's a way to rewrite the last paragraph to make it clearer

r12a: it's quite difficult to parse that sentence
… "If displayable strings contain or might contain bidirectional text"

addison: suppose you have a field, if they have metadata, you have bidi isolation, and all will be well
… from the point of view of spillover effect

This specification does not (yet) include mechanisms for callers to

associate language or direction metadata with the displayable strings

they provide as input to the API (e.g., {{PaymentCredentialInstrument/displayName}}).

addison: this talks about the base direction ^

r12a: I didn't know what you mean by "bidirectional text"
… it wasn't entirely sure what "the application" is

addison: it's the receiver, the consumer

r12a: "the consuming application needs to ensure that they correctly process bidi text"

addison: two parts
… I will request these changes
… and update our guidance in specdev to match

r12a: I'll finish the revision of qa-bidi-unicode-controls

ACTION: addison: propose changes to the bidi recommendation text and update spc pr 232 with that

<ghurlbot> Sorry, I don't know what repository to use.

<trackbot> Created ACTION-1253 - Propose changes to the bidi recommendation text and update spc pr 232 with that [on Addison Phillips - due 2023-03-16].

addison: thank you

Review proposed changes to accept-language

https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/yAOfFp7elrw

Tanych/accept-language

r12a: basically, Google is saying all this stuff after the first entry of the AL header is not necessary
… which sounds drastic to me

xfq_: they won't send more than one language in the header

r12a: they're talking about reducing Navigator.languages as well
… I assume this is security related

addison: it's fingerprinting

r12a: it's also possible not to get anything out of the web that you would actually want to get out of it

<r12a> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RkPDf7DNtcOj4KXeW8wNCuYfto-drnGYST_NvZe3GoY/edit

<r12a> "Our proposal is to only send the user’s most preferred language (for previous example is en-US) in the Accept-Language header instead of sending all languages in the Accept-Language header."

xfq_: we should think about how we strike a balance between privacy and features users need

<Bert> I wonder how this proposal differs from the existing (experimental) RFC 2295

atsushi: the number of people using more than two languages might be small

addison: the numbers are probably reasonably small
… most browsers use the system locale as AL
… minority language speakers may not run their OS in that language
… it's probably a small number of people relative to the total web population of the web
… these are the people who are disadvantaged the most
… they might be tracked

atsushi: make it behind a permission prompt?

addison: maybe they should have a warning or something
… as a WG, it is not our responsibility to champion security stuff, it is our responsibility to champion global users
… should we take a position say that "don't forget these use cases"

https://github.com/Tanych/accept-language/issues

ACTION: addison: add issue to the accept-language repo with sense of WG

<ghurlbot> Sorry, I don't know what repository to use.

<trackbot> Created ACTION-1254 - Add issue to the accept-language repo with sense of wg [on Addison Phillips - due 2023-03-16].

addison: should I take an action to start a conversation with Victor Tan?

xfq_: I think so

I18N Glossary references

w3c/i18n-glossary#21

<ghurlbot> Pull Request 21 Address #19 (instructions for using) (aphillips)

https://deploy-preview-21--i18n-glossary.netlify.app/

addison: instructions for use

https://deploy-preview-21--i18n-glossary.netlify.app/#howto

addison: the Bikeshed section is super new
… they're based on conversation with @@ I had

r12a: "the definitions in the glossary are defined to be informative rather than normative", and may change from time to time
… what I've been wondering is to what extent we expect people to refer to the document
… I think our consensus was to take our definition and maintain it in their spec

addison: two use cases here
… associates with comments we made on some spec
… an example in SPC, we talked about locale
… rather than adding one sentence in their spec
… they can just refer to ours

r12a: that's informative reference
… as opposed to normative reference
… "we're defining locale, with these parameters"

addison: if css defines code point/unit, grapheme etc.
… you want to be specific on what you mean
… we have a lot of jargons

r12a: I would think that it might be useful to extend your second paragraph a bit more
… "if you want normative definition, define it in your document ,if you want informative def, refer to our doc"

addison: what about our relationship with Infra
… are we happy with that relationship?

r12a: expectation is that we're happy with it until we find something we're not happy with

xfq_: in Infra they define string as a sequence of unsigned 16-bit integers
… which might not apply to all W3C specs
… if we define string, we might want to define abstract string

addison: we don't define string
… but we have recommendation in specdev

r12a: I'm rewriting the glossary

export

r12a: when other specs import it, do they import the text, or a link?

addison: link

w3c/PNG-spec#270

addison: PNG issue ^

w3c/i18n-glossary#20

https://w3c.github.io/PNG-spec/#13Text-chunk-processing

"Decoders running on systems with a non-Latin-1 legacy character encoding should remap character codes so that Latin-1 characters are displayed correctly."

addison: the use I recommended in PNG, is it appropriate?

r12a: Chris asked it because it's in a normative statement

addison: that normative statement contains a link to our informative document
… is that the right thing for us to recommend to people?
… if that normative statement requires a normative def, I would say you should import it in the spec

r12a: import the link?

addison: import the text

r12a: we should make that clear
… when going through the entries
… we don't need any ids because respec adds it automatically
… I can't find lint-ignore in the latest respec docs

addison: I think you can make it a global config
… instead of adding it to all of our dfns

w3c/i18n-glossary#25

r12a: we don't need plural forms because respec recognizes that
… data-lt captures the alternatives

data-lt="localization|localized|L10N|Localization" can be reduced to data-lt="localized|L10N"

addison: let's test it
… when we're sure I'll clean it

r12a: Unicode code point is not in the right section
… wonder we should post a version it part way through

addison: if you make a PR you can continue working on it

addison: I usually use my fork

r12a: I've done half of these
… is there a benefit in making a PR?
… the way I usually do a PR is to do it on a website
… capture all in dreamweaver and past all on github

addison: if you use github branch you can sync your branch

r12a: when I edit it in github it creates a branch for you
… no need to maintain a branch in my own computer
… I have too many repos

AOB?

r12a: I'm rewriting pretty much the whole glossary
… watch out for conflicts

close action-1249

<trackbot> Closed action-1249.

ghurlbot, bye

Summary of action items

  1. addison: request physical meeting at tpac
  2. addison: propose changes to the bidi recommendation text and update spc pr 232 with that
  3. addison: add issue to the accept-language repo with sense of WG
Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 210 (Wed Jan 11 19:21:32 2023 UTC).

Diagnostics

Succeeded: s/half a dozen/half a dozen participants/

Succeeded: s/SecurePaymentRequest/SecurePaymentConfirmation/

Maybe present: r12a, xfq

All speakers: addison, atsushi, Bert, JcK, r12a, xfq, xfq_

Active on IRC: addison, Bert, r12a, xfq_