14:37:01 RRSAgent has joined #i18n 14:37:05 logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/01/16-i18n-irc 14:37:12 Meeting: Internationalization Working Group Teleconference 14:37:19 agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/b7edae68-f52c-4aab-a1a6-3c37459e0786/20250116T150000/ 14:37:19 clear agenda 14:37:19 agenda+ Agenda Review 14:37:19 agenda+ Action Items 14:37:21 agenda+ Info Share 14:37:23 agenda+ RADAR Review 14:37:25 agenda+ Pending Issue Review 14:37:28 agenda+ CSS Font Fingerprinting 14:37:30 agenda+ Normativity of i18n-glossary 14:37:32 agenda+ Specdev changes related to TAG design-principles 14:37:35 agenda+ How to make list markers stand upright in vertical text 14:37:35 agenda+ AOB? 14:37:54 Chair: Addison Phillips 14:37:59 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/01/16-i18n-minutes.html addison 14:55:17 JcK has joined #i18n 14:58:13 present+ 15:01:01 present+ 15:02:23 present+ Richard, JcK, Atsushi 15:03:29 atsushi has joined #i18n 15:04:19 zakim, take up agendum 1 15:04:19 agendum 1 -- Agenda Review -- taken up [from agendabot] 15:04:23 agenda? 15:04:53 scribe+ 15:05:03 zakim, take up agendum 2 15:05:03 agendum 2 -- Action Items -- taken up [from agendabot] 15:05:09 https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues 15:05:17 #153 15:05:18 https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/153 -> Action 153 ask PLH what happened with wasm-2 CR since we have an issue open (on aphillips) due 2024-12-26 15:05:48 close #153 15:05:49 Closed -> issue #153 https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/153 15:05:53 #152 15:05:54 https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/152 -> Action 152 request FPWD of string-search (on xfq) due 2024-12-26 15:06:03 close #152 15:06:06 Closed -> issue #152 https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/152 15:06:10 #150 15:06:11 https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/150 -> Action 150 add string-search to i18n-editors and get an echidna token (on xfq) due 2024-12-19 15:06:36 xfq: Not done yet. 15:06:37 #148 15:06:38 https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/148 -> Action 148 propose specdev text related to design-principles#464 discussion (on aphillips) due 2024-12-12 15:06:50 #147 15:06:51 https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/147 -> Action 147 Follow up on normativity warnings about glossary (on aphillips) 15:07:11 #143 15:07:12 https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/143 -> Action 143 make comments on the encoding issue attached to i18n-activity#1940 (on aphillips) due 2024-11-28 15:07:37 addison: Need to look atthat... 15:07:45 #142 15:07:45 https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/142 -> Action 142 check if we can publish the new version of jlreq (on himorin) due 2024-11-21 15:08:10 s/atthat/at 143.../ 15:08:24 #135 15:08:25 https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/135 -> Action 135 follow up on XR issue 1393 about locale in session (on aphillips) due 2024-10-17 15:08:35 #127 15:08:35 https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/127 -> Action 127 make a list of shared topics of interest between TG2 and W3C-I18N (on aphillips) due 2024-09-30 15:08:46 #89 15:08:46 https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/89 -> Action 89 update i18n specs to support dark mode (on xfq) due 2024-04-18 15:08:55 #33 15:08:56 https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/33 -> Action 33 Close issues marked `close?` or bring to WG for further review (on aphillips) 15:09:11 addison: I closed some 15:09:14 #7 15:09:14 https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/7 -> Action 7 Remind shepherds to tend to their awaiting comment resolutions (Evergreen) (on aphillips, xfq, himorin, r12a, bert-github) due 18 Jul 2023 15:09:23 #4 15:09:23 https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/4 -> Action 4 Work with respec and bikeshed to provide the character markup template as easy-to-use markup (on aphillips) due 27 Jul 2023 15:09:34 zakim, take up agendum 3 15:09:34 agendum 3 -- Info Share -- taken up [from agendabot] 15:10:09 xfq: There is a formal objection on CSS, but it's on the agenda already. 15:10:38 https://www.w3.org/TR/clreq/ 15:10:54 https://www.w3.org/TR/string-search/ 15:11:16 ... clreq, with restructure of language matrix. Published to TR ^^ 15:11:25 zakim, take up agendum 4 15:11:25 agendum 4 -- RADAR Review -- taken up [from agendabot] 15:11:32 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/91/views/1 15:11:50 addison: No incoming requests 15:12:35 Bert: Media Capabilities not yet 15:12:54 zakim, take up agendum 5 15:12:54 agendum 5 -- Pending Issue Review -- taken up [from agendabot] 15:13:02 https://github.com/w3c/i18n-activity/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Apending 15:13:17 #1971 15:13:18 Issue 1971 not found 15:13:25 i18n-activity#1971 15:13:26 https://github.com/w3c/i18n-activity/issues/1971 -> Issue 1971 Clarification on `unicode-bidi` for `input type text` and `ruby` (by w3cbot) [pending] [tracker] [s:html] [Agenda+] 15:13:40 addison: What seems interesting is issue 1971. 15:13:53 whatwg/html#10896 15:13:54 https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/10896 -> Issue 10896 Clarification on `unicode-bidi` for `input type text` and `ruby` (by Ahmad-S792) [topic: rendering] [topic: forms] [i18n-tracker] 15:14:12 ... I'm starting to think about it. 15:14:21 ... Please, have a look. 15:14:27 agenda? 15:14:37 zakim, take up agendum 9 15:14:37 agendum 9 -- How to make list markers stand upright in vertical text -- taken up [from addison] 15:14:57 https://w3c.github.io/i18n-drafts/questions/qa-upright-counters-in-vertical.html#layout 15:15:54 r12a: Japanese discussion about space around counters. I added a section about that. 15:16:19 ... There' sbeen quite a bit more change to the article. 15:16:32 addison: Home work for next week? 15:16:48 action: addison: remind folks to review the qa-upright-counters-in-vertical doc for next time 15:16:55 Created -> action #154 https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/154 15:17:10 zakim, take up agendum 7 15:17:10 agendum 7 -- Normativity of i18n-glossary -- taken up [from agendabot] 15:18:00 addison: We talked last time with Philippe about the glossary, about making it a Rec, a Registry... 15:19:00 xfq: It feels weird to make it Rec track or a Registry. But there are a few (not many) definitions that look normative. 15:19:37 ... So we may make it normative in the end. 15:19:59 rrsagent, make minutes 15:20:00 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/01/16-i18n-minutes.html xfq 15:20:06 addison: We will have to make separation between the normative and non-normative definitions. 15:20:37 r12a: First step is to find out which defs are normative. Who has the action to do that? 15:21:00 addison: No one now. 15:21:14 xfq: If we use Unicode def... 15:21:42 action: addison: review glossary definitions for normativity or candidates for normativity 15:21:43 Created -> action #155 https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/issues/155 15:21:49 addison: It won't separate neatly, some defs are imported, some are informative... 15:22:02 ... I can start make a table. 15:22:25 xfq: Sometimes a part of a def is normative and some parts are illustrative. 15:23:28 scribe+ 15:23:43 Bert: I do think visually separating the normative and non-normative parts is the best way 15:23:55 ... although it will have to be a lot of work 15:24:03 addison: I think that's valid 15:24:12 agenda? 15:24:18 rrsagent, make minutes 15:24:19 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/01/16-i18n-minutes.html xfq 15:24:30 atsushi: Wondered if we can simplify things. 15:24:51 ... Terminology. 15:24:52 present+ Bert 15:25:17 r12a: Let's look at what we're dealing with. Probably not many at all. 15:25:57 ... The ones that point to Unicode are not normative in our glossary. And shouldn't be exported. 15:26:11 addison: Most of it not written in normative style. 15:26:16 zakim, take up agendum 6 15:26:16 agendum 6 -- CSS Font Fingerprinting -- taken up [from agendabot] 15:26:37 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2025Jan/0001.html 15:26:43 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-review-comments/2025Jan/0000.html 15:27:21 xfq: At TPAC, I had a meeting with folks from CSS, PING and TAG. 15:27:30 ... We discussed the issue. 15:27:57 ... We had a rough consensus. We should give the user options to configure local fonts. 15:28:27 ... Brave browser is in Privacy group, but couldn't attend the meetings. 15:28:45 ... CSS received a Formal Objection from Brave. 15:28:56 ... They don't want the compromise. 15:29:32 Chris Lilley wrote this for TPAC: https://www.w3.org/2024/09/font-i18n-privacy.html 15:29:34 ... The spec allows an implementation to either allow or disallow local fonts to balance privacy and i18n. 15:29:44 ... Brave was not satisfied. 15:30:28 r12a: I think I saw that Peter Snyder (Brave) agrees that uses can have control. 15:31:11 see: 15:31:13 ---- 15:31:16 If the Web is going to flourish and win over other application platforms, 15:31:16 it's not sufficient to pose such concerns in an either/or choice and stop 15:31:16 there (or to ignore Web users who need the platform to both protect their 15:31:18 privacy AND include top-tier internationalization support). Yet, 15:31:20 unfortunately, this is exactly what the WG has done over the 4+ years we've 15:31:22 urged them to address this issue. It's possible the correct solution hasn't 15:31:24 been proposed yet, but that's a reason to keep working on the problem, not 15:31:26 leave it be. 15:31:28 --- 15:32:06 addison: s/ that uses/ that users 15:32:12 s/ that uses/ that users 15:32:20 s|addison: s/ that uses/ that users| 15:32:45 Chris's doc quotes CSS4 as saying: 15:32:46 --- 15:32:48 The default set of installed fonts will vary by UA, platform, and locale; it is important that users be able to customise which installed fonts are available for rendering web pages and to which generic font families, if any, these fonts are mapped. 15:32:52 --- 15:33:20 r12a: The quote above seems to say that users need to control this. 15:33:44 xfq: CSS needs to work on it. Anything we can do? 15:34:04 https://drafts.csswg.org/css-fonts-4/#font-matching-algorithm 15:34:18 addison: My quote is from this spec ^^ 15:34:28 > UAs may choose a hybrid approach, where some user-installed fonts are initially exposed for internationalization, but others aren’t. Again, users should be able to customise this starting set. 15:34:59 ... It also says ^^ (‘hybrid approach’). 15:35:21 UAs are expected to also provide a convenient means for users to add and subtract fonts to meet their particular needs. 15:35:42 ... the ‘should’ is not capitalized, not clear if it is a normative word. 15:35:59 addison: Does CSS want us to say anything? 15:36:52 r12a: It's between CSS and Brave. But the CSS spec doesn't seem as black & white as the FO says. 15:37:02 addison: We have a call with CSS soon. 15:37:27 agenda? 15:37:39 zakim, take up agendum 8 15:37:39 agendum 8 -- Specdev changes related to TAG design-principles -- taken up [from agendabot] 15:38:06 We've been working with TAG to align the guidance in our document vs. design-principles. Addison had an action to propose text. Let's review the PR. 15:38:20 https://github.com/w3c/bp-i18n-specdev/pull/149 15:38:20 https://github.com/w3c/bp-i18n-specdev/pull/149 -> Pull Request 149 Address differences between DESIGN-PRINCIPLES and SPECDEV (by aphillips) [Agenda+] [Best Practice] [normative] 15:38:21 addison: We noticed our doc didn't agree with the TAG's design principles. 15:38:26 https://deploy-preview-149--bp-i18n-specdev.netlify.app/#char_string 15:38:58 ... I attempted to make changes to specdev, see the pull request and preview ^^ 15:39:52 ... Ours *looked* different but isn't essentially different. This change spells out when to use USVString and DOMString. 15:40:22 xfq: It kind of phrased the guidance the other way round. 15:41:07 addison: I want to try and get the TAG to use our text. 15:42:39 addison: We want most interface definitions to use DOMString, and we don't want them to mix DOMString and USVStriing. 15:44:38 addison: If the TAG's design principles are wrong, we don't have to be consistent with them. 15:45:08 ... Similar to discussion about NFC. Normalizing is probably a good idea, but nobody is requiring it. 15:45:37 ... I should probably add something about interface definitions. 15:45:38 agenda? 15:47:06 Bert: not specific to this spec but I was wondering in general how specific to JS this discussion was 15:47:29 ... DOMString seems to be a rather strange thing that I don't encounter anywhere else 15:47:54 addison: TAG and WHATWG would like to claim this is for the web platform as a whole 15:48:06 ... in practice, that means JS and DOM strings 15:48:18 Bert: I'm not sure about JSON 15:49:44 addison: MessageFormat 2 required checking surrogate pairs but we removed that, at least for the text parts. 15:49:54 ... MessageFormat 2 it's not more like DOMString but more like USVString? 15:51:03 zakim, take up agendum 10 15:51:03 agendum 10 -- AOB? -- taken up [from agendabot] 15:51:40 addison: We have a CSS joint meeting on Tuesday. 15:51:56 xfq: Regrets for next three meetings. 15:52:25 addison: Will you have to time to the reviews before then? 15:52:41 xfq: Better let somebody else do them. 15:52:58 atsushi: It's only proposed amendments, isn't it? 15:53:17 ... I can do WebRTC in next two weeks. 15:54:05 addison: I'll take the VC specs 15:54:23 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/01/16-i18n-minutes.html addison 15:54:29 rrsagent, make minutes 15:54:30 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/01/16-i18n-minutes.html xfq 15:54:35 zakim, who is here? 15:54:35 Present: addison, xfq, Richard, JcK, Atsushi, Bert 15:54:35 On IRC I see atsushi, RRSAgent, Zakim, addison, r12a, gb, plh, xfq, Mek, florian, eemeli, csarven, hadleybeeman, alastairc, koji, jyasskin, cwilso, Rachael, astearns, fantasai, 15:54:35 ... aki, agendabot, Bert 16:18:28 bigbluehat has joined #i18n