– DRAFT –
Internationalization (I18N) Working Group Teleconference

<gb> Issue 240 Could we build symbolic annotations with existing Web standards? (by DuncanMacWeb) [i18n-tracker]

Agenda Review

<gb> Issue 240 Could we build symbolic annotations with existing Web standards? (by DuncanMacWeb) [i18n-tracker]

<gb> Found actions in w3c/i18n-actions: #47, #46, #45, #44, #43, #42, #41, #39, #35, #33, #32, #18, #16, #13, #12, #11, #10, #9, #8, #7, #5, #4

<addison> #47

<gb> Action 47 make the CSSWG aware of Warichu (on frivoal) due 2023-10-04

<addison> #46

<gb> Action 46 read the string-meta explainer and consider the new approach addison proposes (on xfq, r12a) due 2023-09-28

<addison> #45

<gb> Action 45 connect unicode sah to the adapt 240 thread (on aphillips) due 2023-09-28

<addison> close #45

<gb> Closed action #45

<addison> #44

<gb> Action 44 follow up on the bidi thread of rdf-star (on r12a) due 2023-09-19

<addison> #43

<gb> Action 43 pull together the list of win/mac/etc apis for setting base direction and/or language (on aphillips) due 2023-09-18

<addison> #42

<gb> Action 42 work on tc39 proposal (meet with addison and eemeli to start) (on xfq) due 2023-09-18

<addison> #41

<gb> Action 41 propose new specdev text on strings for xml (on aphillips) due 2023-09-07

<addison> #39

<gb> Action 39 develop best practice guidelines for name-like fields (on aphillips) due 2023-08-31

<addison> #35

<gb> Action 35 make the edits of CSS #5478 (on fantasai) due 2023-08-30

<addison> #33

<gb> Action 33 Close issues marked `close?` or bring to WG for further review (on aphillips)

o/

<r12a> o/+

addison: I've now reviewed all of the needs resolution issues marked closed
… and the only ones still open are the ones that I'm bringing back to the WG for review
… I have an agenda item today for us to look at that

<addison> #32

<gb> Action 32 Approve the character markup PR (on fantasai) due 2023-08-17

<addison> #18

<gb> Action 18 Have informal explanation sessions about counter style translations with csswg members (on frivoal, fantasai)

<addison> #16

<gb> Action 16 Keep track of line-breaking in Korean for i18n-discuss#11 (on aphillips)

addison: we still have a significant number of tracker marked close issues

<addison> #13

<gb> Action 13 Make sure generics are comfortable to read in the content language (on frivoal)

addison: and I'm working through those

addison: this one relates to the addition of additional generics at TPAC
… we discussed with them that they're going to add additional generic mechanism

<addison> close #13

<gb> Closed action #13

<addison> #12

<gb> Action 12 Upgrade/edit the explainer to address issues raised by google (on aphillips)

<addison> #11

<gb> Action 11 Triage all css properties to determine which are logical, physical, or na by default (on frivoal)

<addison> #10

<gb> Action 10 With florian triage richard's article into a list of potential generics (on frivoal, fantasai)

<addison> #9

<gb> Action 9 Follow up with ecma-402 on next steps and start tc39 discussion (on aphillips)

<addison> close #9

<gb> Closed action #9

<addison> #8

<gb> Action 8 Create pr against canvas formatted text (on aphillips)

<addison> #7

<gb> Action 7 Remind shepherds to tend to their awaiting comment resolutions (Evergreen) (on aphillips, xfq, himorin, r12a, bert-github)

<addison> #5

<gb> Action 5 Check into how to list questions at the top of a digest and/or improve lang enablement communications (on r12a)

<addison> #4

<gb> Action 4 Work with respec and bikeshed to provide the character markup template as easy-to-use markup (on r12a)

addison: my intention is to publish specdev out to /TR
… so that it's somewhat in sync with tr-design
… and then we can go back and get the image stuff in tr-design

Info Share

addison: I worked with PLH to insert some additional guard steps into the process
… our transitions will not proceed if we have a needs resolution issue open against a spec
… I think that's a good thing
… I'm going to be working with PLH and some of the AC reps to push on companies that haven't contributed to this WG
… try to generate some more participation

RADAR Review

addison: if you could think of people who ought to be participating and who work for a member company, let me know

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

addison: we have no new incoming requests

xfq: no issues for DAPT

addison: Securing Verifiable Credentials using JOSE and COSE
… they have an i18n consideration section
… I did look at it and filed an issue about that
… mainly because I think they should remove their i18n consideration section
… it doesn't say anything useful

r12a: include a note so the implementers don't ignore the i18n considerations
… which sounded to me quite useful

<gb> Issue 240 Could we build symbolic annotations with existing Web standards? (by DuncanMacWeb) [i18n-tracker]

I18N ⇔ CSS

https://www.w3.org/2023/09/27-i18n-minutes.html

<addison> fuqiao: discussed a few things

<addison> ... generic font family

<addison> ... florian says the wg wasn't sure about adding new generics, but no longer the case

<addison> ... if useful we can add them

<addison> ... he thinks we should start making a list of font faces, what their license is

<addison> ... which generic they belong to

<addison> ... has some questions about richard's article

<addison> addison: who is "we"? I18N?

<addison> fuqiao: i18n + css

<addison> ... wonders if the article is the list of the most important ones

<addison> richard: the article just picks several styles to make clear what we're talking about

... that we need to support styles, not meant to be exhaustive
… if you read my orthography notes
… came across one the other day, sure there are plenty more

https://w3c.github.io/i18n-drafts/articles/typography/fontstyles.en.html

addison: I think some of the lreq group might want to think about it

Jck: Arabic is an example you probably do not want to use

addison: the Arabic script has a variety of font styles
… r12a's article has a number of those
… how one would approach, I'm not 100% sure
… but that seems like an area where we would want the community to work through it

<r12a> https://r12a.github.io/scripts/switch.html?section=writing_styles

<r12a> ^ just lists a few

addison: here's a list of fonts, here's what license they have, etc.

r12a: I was worried a bit when we're trying to list all the fonts
… I think what is useful is to list the system fonts, pre-installed system fonts, for a particular orthography
… for some languages where there is no installed font it gets a little more complicated

addison: I would expect if there's a system installed font on the major platforms for a generic family

r12a: Apple gives you access to most of the Noto fonts
… but I don't think Windows does that

addison: if we start with a well described space like Chinese
… that can serve as a model for other languages

r12a: I think what is also gonna be necessary though is a clear description of why people use this particular font style

https://www.w3.org/TR/clreq/#four_commonly_used_typefaces_for_chinese_composition

ACTION: xfq to work with clreq to investigate or produce a generics proposal

<gb> Created action #48

atsushi: we cannot divide fonts into categories clearly, like some fonts are for accessibility

r12a: bear in mind there are minority languages that have distinct styling
… two very different ways of being written

<gb> Issue 240 Could we build symbolic annotations with existing Web standards? (by DuncanMacWeb) [i18n-tracker]

fuqiao: about sideways-rl etc., florian says no news, curious if a language needs this

r12a: English
… we have people like Jen from Apple who put tutorials together telling people that if they want to put their English text running bottom to top or top to bottom

addison: it's no one's primary writing mode that I'm aware of
… but it's a secondary mode that people need

ACTION: addison to contact unicode about emphasis mark skipping

<gb> Created action #49

r12a: the AOB part of that minutes is quite an important thing
… the text autospace was at the top of the Chinese list, which sounds good to me
… the other thing for me is vertical forms

Internationalization Review for VCDM 2.0

addison: they invited us to a special call next Tuesday
… I will go to that call
… you're all invited to that call
… my intention is to show them the web app manifest example
… regardless of what you do at the end, should be able to point to a natural language string and find out what the lang/dir of that is
… either because there's a document level default
… or because there's an override on the value
… I don't actually care how you do that, so long as it is possible
… they are a JSON-LD based spec
… but they don't want to force people to use JSON-LD processing
… like @context

Definition of 'string' revisited

https://deploy-preview-117--bp-i18n-specdev.netlify.app/#char_string

w3c/bp-i18n-specdev#117

addison: I have not made the changes to the glossary pending us finishing this work
… there's a recommendation about DOMString and a recommendation about USVString
… I'm open to suggestions

<gb> Issue 240 Could we build symbolic annotations with existing Web standards? (by DuncanMacWeb) [i18n-tracker]

addison: I would like to finish this off and merge it, maybe we'll do that in next week's call

Adapt#240 and Unicode SAH

addison: the last thing that I'll take up is adapt#240

<gb> Issue 240 Could we build symbolic annotations with existing Web standards? (by DuncanMacWeb) [i18n-tracker]

addison: Debbie Anderson and SAH haven't chimed in on the thread to say what Unicode thinks

r12a: I think that what they're looking for actually is not symbols
… but Unicode code points that represent concept
… and some of those concepts are all associated with Bliss symbols
… and some of them are not
… we have this potentially unbounded list of concepts
… could be represented with very different symbols
… and different repertoieres are going to have different sets of concept bindings
… that sounds kind of scary to me
… making a hieroglyphic system
… hieroglyphic is very similar to Chinese characters in many ways
… if they're defining concepts, they're going to have a whole bunch of code points that don't really have a representative glyph
… it's like defining an ontology

AOB?

xfq: vacation from Sep 29 to Oct 6

r12a: vacation tomorrow