RE: [Minutes] MLW-LT call 2013-02-04

Hi Felix, 

 

I attended this call.

 

Cheers,

__________________________________

Pablo Nieto Caride

Dpto. Técnico/I+D+i

Linguaserve Internacionalización de Servicios, S.A.

Tel.: +34 91 761 64 60 ext. 0422
Fax: +34 91 542 89 28 

E-mail:  <mailto:pablo.nieto@linguaserve.com> pablo.nieto@linguaserve.com

www.linguaserve.com <http://www.linguaserve.com/> 

 

«En cumplimiento con lo previsto con los artículos 21 y 22 de la Ley
34/2002, de 11 de julio, de Servicios de la Sociedad de Información y
Comercio Electrónico, le informamos que procederemos al archivo y
tratamiento de sus datos exclusivamente con fines de promoción de los
productos y servicios ofrecidos por LINGUASERVE INTERNACIONALIZACIÓN DE
SERVICIOS, S.A. En caso de que Vdes. no deseen que procedamos al archivo y
tratamiento de los datos proporcionados, o no deseen recibir comunicaciones
comerciales sobre los productos y servicios ofrecidos, comuníquenoslo a
clients@linguaserve.com, y su petición será inmediatamente cumplida.»

 

"According to the provisions set forth in articles 21 and 22 of Law 34/2002
of July 11 regarding Information Society and eCommerce Services, we will
store and use your personal data with the sole purpose of marketing the
products and services offered by LINGUASERVE INTERNACIONALIZACIÓN DE
SERVICIOS, S.A. If you do not wish your personal data to be stored and
handled, or you do not wish to receive further information regarding
products and services offered by our company, please e-mail us to
clients@linguaserve.com. Your request will be processed immediately.”

__________________________________

De: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org] 
Enviado el: lunes, 11 de febrero de 2013 18:48
Para: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
Asunto: [Minutes] MLW-LT call 2013-02-04

 

Hi all,

here are the minutes from last week call one
http://www.w3.org/2013/02/04-mlw-lt-minutes.html

apologies for the delay. Let me know if something (e.g. attendance) needs to
be fixed.

Best,

Felix

   [1]W3C
 
      [1] http://www.w3.org/
 
                               - DRAFT -
 
            MultilingualWeb-LT Working Group Teleconference
 
04 Feb 2013
 
   See also: [2]IRC log
 
      [2] http://www.w3.org/2013/02/04-mlw-lt-irc
 
Attendees
 
   Present
          daveL, shawn, chriLi, yves, mauricio, omstefanovm,
          kfritsche, dom
 
   Regrets
          not available
 
   Chair
          daveL
 
   Scribe
          DomJones
 
Contents
 
     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]allowed characters regex discussion
         2. [5]text for unicode normalization and best practices
            action for Shaun issue-73
         3. [6]domain comments issue-75 action for Christian
         4. [7]terminology and disambiguation issue-68 action for
            Tadej
         5. [8]Minutes and Felix' comments
         6. [9]How to move forward with disambiguation vs term
            issue-67?
         7. [10]issue-110 precedence between xml:lang and lang
         8. [11]issue-115 SHOULD and SHOULD NOT examples
     * [12]Summary of Action Items
     __________________________________________________________
 
allowed characters regex discussion
 
   shawnm: The subset is safe, reg exp that match the subset will
   be as how to refer to character ranges. These ranges end on
   chars which are unassigned. You could put a codepoint into the
   reg ex, there are no escape sequences. On the tested engines
   that's fine but you are putting an unassigned code-point into
   the exp. This is unprincipled for the standard and would like
   strange in ITS spec.
 
   … in the spec maybe refer to it with XML values
 
   daveL: Any comments?
 
   … did you say there was another update to do on that shawn?
 
   shawnm: not complete yet but will send this week
 
text for unicode normalization and best practices action for Shaun
issue-73
 
   daveL: action on text for unicode norm. Action 430.
 
   shawnm: not done yet, still pending.
 
   … will have reg ex done by wednesday call not action 430
 
   daveL: Appreciate that
 
domain comments issue-75 action for Christian
 
   <daveL>
   [13]https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/a
   ctions/434
 
     [13]
https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/actions/434
 
   daveL: Action 434 were you able to get any further on this
   Christian?
 
   chriLi: Will start working on this tomorrow
 
   daveL: Appreciate this
 
terminology and disambiguation issue-68 action for Tadej
 
   <daveL>
   [14]https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/a
   ctions/435
 
     [14]
https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/actions/435
 
   daveL: Action 435 tadej asks for this to be postponed until
   wednesday in his absence. (only on IRC)
 
   … Christian do you have time to talk to Tadej and Milan about
   this?
 
   chrLi: Yes, on wednesday
 
Minutes and Felix' comments
 
   <daveL>
   [15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
   lt/2013Jan/0210.html
 
     [15]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013Jan/0210.h
tml
 
   <daveL>
   [16]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
   lt-comments/2013Jan/0101.html
 
     [16]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013J
an/0101.html
 
   daveL: things that weren't captured on actions. There are a
   number of things there relating to best practices. He was
   asking christian if that would help with the NIF converstion /
   normalisation. AFAIK: Felix has not had time to discuss NIF
   with Sebastian Hellman. Christian, have you replied to that
   already?
 
   … you'd had a comment on canonical XML and interchange formats.
 
   … Felix was asking what that topic would address normalisation
   issues to do with NIF converstion.
 
   chriLi: I would need to revisit Felix's comments to answer that
 
   daveL: maybe worth waiting to see what we get from Shawn in a
   day or 2
 
   … felix likely out of action this week.
 
   … seems like a big topic
 
   We'll leave that for now
 
   chriLi: I will look into this in the meantime
 
How to move forward with disambiguation vs term issue-67?
 
   <daveL> deferred until wednesday
 
   daveL: a couple of issues for discussions, raised by felix
 
issue-110 precedence between xml:lang and lang
 
   … between co-chairs issues have been divided up so we focus on
   different things and assure tracker is kept up to date.
 
   … we have an xhtml test which addreses this but querying
   whether it should be there or not
 
   Yves_ when you xml lang in html5 this is allowed but it has to
   have the same value as lang and can only be there if lang
   exists as well. Dont think we need to test for that we just
   look for lang value and see if its the same as xml lang. -ve
   test shows invalid HTML5 test.
 
   … for XHTML the xml lang value takes precedence. Problem is we
   didnt say we were processing XHTML therefore if this is
   required should be a different test.
 
   shawnm: Should not have a third mode. XHTML should be processed
   as XML or as HTML hoping for markup. There is perhaps an ambig
   over lang or xml lang taking precidence.
 
   Yves_ XHTML file using validator.nu raises issues. If I try to
   process the files as an XML doc then then both notations are
   required.
 
   shawnm: XHTML would raise bigger issues using XML markup?
 
   Yves_: only problem is the XML Lang attribute.
 
   … I guess we can work around this but worry about others, using
   other parsers.
 
   daveL: Anyone else have concerns about this? Share shawns broad
   view as not testing against XHTML.
 
   Yves_: Do we have a should keyword in the documentation?
 
   … yes we do
 
   <Yves_>
   [17]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/i
   ts20/its20.html#xhtml5-markup
 
     [17]
http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#x
html5-markup
 
   daveL: a general should - is not generally tested for. We
   havent to date but we dont have many of them
 
   shawnm: An interesting should "quotes txt" it is perfectly
   acceptable to have an XML only tool within the ITS spec.
   Following should in section 7 makes doc that is not processable
   by XML only validator.
 
   Yves_: tricky as file is processable by two different
   validaotrs with different expectations.
 
   shawnm: is it acceptable to use both notations?
 
   Yves_: Maybe its fine the way it is and that we dont test for
   it, just provide guidelines.
 
   daveL: could that should be converted to a best-practice?
 
   shawnm: Would feel more comfortable about this being a best
   practice
 
   Yves_: good arg for both
 
   shawnm: Lang - correct behaviour - xhtml = lang attribute, in
   xml = only xml lang, it takes precidence
 
   Yves_: remove the example from the XML test case as there is no
   need for it there
 
   … still not resolved general xml issue but we should not have
   an XHTML example there
 
   shawnm: I agree with you
 
   <scribe> ACTION: leroy to remove XHTML example for ITS language
   information [recorded in
   [18]http://www.w3.org/2013/02/04-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action01]
 
   <trackbot> Created ACTION-441 - Remove XHTML example for ITS
   language information [on Leroy Finn - due 2013-02-11].
 
   Yves_: How we test XHTML is a different topic, right?
 
   daveL: Yes, should raise as a general topic
 
   <scribe> ACTION: daveL to raise an issue on how to test for
   XHTML [recorded in
   [19]http://www.w3.org/2013/02/04-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action02]
 
   <trackbot> Created ACTION-442 - Raise an issue on how to test
   for XHTML [on David Lewis - due 2013-02-11].
 
   daveL: Will raise the issue, Yves, can you respond to that?
 
   Yves_: yes, of course
 
issue-115 SHOULD and SHOULD NOT examples
 
   <daveL>
   [20]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
   lt-comments/2013Jan/0214.html
 
     [20]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013J
an/0214.html
 
   Yves_: SVG can be in XHTML and Jirka raise an issue that XML
   cannot be validated in the svg snippet
 
   <Yves_> Jirka:
   [21]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
   lt-comments/2013Jan/0213.html
 
     [21]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013J
an/0213.html
 
   … was an argument from Jirka shown above.
 
   shawnm: no way to put local attributes on svg etc.
 
   Yves_: So its a non-case
 
   shawnm: theoretically yes
 
   … if its important to you as doc author to use local markup on
   embedded svg then use HTML
 
   <daveL>
   [22]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
   lt-comments/2013Jan/0209.html
 
     [22]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013J
an/0209.html
 
   daveL: Comment from mauricio on that topic
 
   mauricio: the most important thing is that these decisions
   effect the impl
 
   implementations we're doing for WP 3
 
   <omstefanov> Mauricio
 
   … I think that we will address that after the contents have
   been translated.
 
   mauricio: A formal way to show what they have done, best
   practices not fully supported.
 
   … I'd like to know a better way to do this
 
   … Can I use XHTML like XML with global rules and locally with
   XML format?
 
   <daveL>
   [23]http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/i
   ts20/its20.html#xhtml5-markup
 
     [23]
http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#x
html5-markup
 
   daveL: In your case (section 7) it should be used like HTML. In
   your case is that HTML for public consumption?
 
   mauricio: The content is extracted from the CMS, translated and
   sent back
 
   daveL: its HTML that is publicly shown.
 
   mauricio: Drupal extracts that
 
   <Yves_> I think in Linguaserve case the XHTML is not for Web
   broswer so using the XML notation for everything is the way to
   go.
 
   <kfritsche> the XHTML is only a interchange format, drupal
   shows it as HTML5
 
   daveL: Section which says should is for public consumption,
   which is not the case in your case.
 
   … Still seems to be an open issue
 
   … need input from Jirka on SVG and other vocabs within HTML
 
   … should we put this is as clairification in the spec?
 
   mauricio: some guidelines would be very appreciated.
 
   daveL: Agree these are big classes of applications
 
   <kfritsche> +1
 
   daveL: Add a note about SVG and MathML re treating XHTML as
   HTML
 
   … implication on best-practice and on the test suite
 
   Yves_: Its a should so should be clairifed in the section. 2
   test cases, one for XML notation and one for XHTML notation.
   Allowing the user to choose.
 
   daveL: So have examples in section 5
 
   … Yves would you be willing to draft some text on that
 
   Yves_: Yes, will do if you raise an issue on that
 
   daveL: One thing, shepherds for various issues… Can you look
   back and see if people have responded. If not, after a week
   please email again stating if you dont hear back within a week
   it implies you are satisfied
 
   … would ask others to follow up in this way
 
   … that way we have a record that we did our best for
   clarification
 
   daveL: meeting closed. Talk on Wednesday
 
Summary of Action Items
 
   [NEW] ACTION: daveL to raise an issue on how to test for XHTML
   [recorded in
   [24]http://www.w3.org/2013/02/04-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action02]
   [NEW] ACTION: leroy to remove XHTML example for ITS language
   information [recorded in
   [25]http://www.w3.org/2013/02/04-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action01]
 
   [End of minutes]
     __________________________________________________________
 
 
    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [26]scribe.perl version
    1.137 ([27]CVS log)
    $Date: 2013-02-11 17:43:44 $
 
     [26] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [27] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/