[All] MINUTES MLW-LT WG 2012-07-12, including short summary

... are at http://www.w3.org/2012/07/12-mlw-lt-minutes.html and below as
text. We didn't make any decisions, but here is a short summary of the
consensus of people on the call:

- parameters for rules ISSUE-16 is close to be closed, we just need a
volunteer to draft text for the spec - Yves I assume?

- the targetPointer ISSUE-15 proposal is close to be closed, with the
global rule containing a pointer attribute: <its:targetPointerRule
selector='//source' targetPointer='../target'/> . Yves will make a proposal
for text

- special requirements ISSUE-36 is moving forward with max-length and the
the forbidden characters. Yves has taken ACTION-167 to talk to Jan and
Kevin about the Microsoft plans

- Arle will follow up on the quality data category ISSUE-34, by ACTION-168:
talking to XLIFF and Interoperability Now. We need a volunteer to put some
placeholder text into the spec - Arle?

- ISSUE-37 Yves will summarize the "reference mechanism" discussion via
mail ACTION-169 and provide examples of how the referencing will look like
in XLIFF.

Best,

Felix

   [1]W3C

      [1] http://www.w3.org/

                               - DRAFT -

                          MLW-LT Working Group

12 Jul 2012

   [2]Agenda

      [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Jul/0154.html

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2012/07/12-mlw-lt-irc

Attendees

   Present
          felix, shaun, Yves, Arle, milan, Pedro, Guiseppe

   Regrets
   Chair
          felix

   Scribe
          Arle

Contents

     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]agenda
         2. [6]last weeks minutes
         3. [7]reminder topics 2,3,4
         4. [8]parameter for rules
         5. [9]targetPointer
         6. [10]special requirements
         7. [11]quality errors
         8. [12]reference topic
     * [13]Summary of Action Items
     __________________________________________________________

agenda

   <fsasaki>
   [14]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
   lt/2012Jul/0154.html

     [14] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Jul/0154.html

   Felix: There are not many people on the call today, so we will
   discuss things, but not make any decisions.

last weeks minutes

   <fsasaki> [15]http://www.w3.org/2012/07/05-mlw-lt-minutes.html

     [15] http://www.w3.org/2012/07/05-mlw-lt-minutes.html

   Felix: If no comments on the minutes, we should move on.

reminder topics 2,3,4

   Felix: Coming back to actions, there are various comments.
   Jirka made comments on the draft, as did Jörg Schütz. We need
   volunteers to put them into the draft.

   Arle: Count me in on that.

   Felix: Just let the list know what edits you want to make.
   ... It shouldn't take too much time.

parameter for rules

   <fsasaki>
   [16]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
   lt/2012Jul/0090.html

     [16] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Jul/0090.html

   Felix: I think we are close to a conclusion here. The URL I
   pasted in had some comments.
   ... Does anyone on the call have any issues on this parameter
   for rules or can we move on? Note that these are guidance for
   implementers.
   ... Any other comments?

targetPointer

   No comments were made

   Felix: This will require more discussion, perhaps between Yves
   and Shaun.

   <fsasaki>
   [17]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-
   lt/2012Jul/0107.html

     [17] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2012Jul/0107.html

   Felix: That is the latest mail on this from Yves, which is a
   reply to a mail from Shaun. Can someone summarize?

   Yves: The original proposal was to look at a possible topic in
   the document, but Shaun brought up the question about multiple
   targets in the document or replicating part to make a
   multilingual document. Shaun makes a convincing argument that
   we cannot deal with both as a single data category.
   ... We need to see who will implement what I proposed, but if
   there is interest in the multilingual document proposal by
   Shaun we should also proceed with that.

   Shaun: I have working code that replicates elements to create
   multilingual documents using xml:lang. I have a method with
   limitations that could be solved by adopting additional
   metadata. I've not tried to do this with a real format, I don't
   want to pursue it unless someone else is interested.

   <fsasaki> <its:targetPointerRule selector='//source'
   targetPointer='../target'/>

   Felix: So we would be OK with moving forward with the one that
   Yves mentioned using XPath and regular expression, as described
   in the example I pasted in and the mail I linked.
   ... You counted implementations in the Okapi integration with
   Declan.
   ... And XLIFF roundtripping.

   (Not sure I got that right).

   Yves: They would actually use the same implementation
   underneath things.

   Milan: We would use the Tikal as used in M4Loc.

   <Yves_> Link to Tikal:
   [18]http://www.opentag.com/okapi/wiki/index.php?title=Tikal

     [18] http://www.opentag.com/okapi/wiki/index.php?title=Tikal

   Felix: I think it is OK to say that they are two different
   implementations, even if they are just different wrappers
   around Tikal. We could accommodate that with more specific test
   cases.

   Yves: We need to test the library as well.
   ... Do I need to do a call for consensus on this?

   Felix: You did not on targetpointer. So write a mail pointing
   to the thread saying that we have everything resolved and see
   if everyone agrees.

   Yves: I will write the definition, if that helps.

   Felix: Sounds good.

special requirements

   Felix: We had a lot of discussions here. Let me summarize.
   ... First, Cocomore wanted a way to list forbidden characters.
   Then there was a requirement to specify maximum length. I tried
   to push Schematron as a solution for this, but I was wrong.
   Yves and others told me that the checking is external to XML,
   in a database, so Schematron doesn't make sense. So we need to
   pass the metadata about checking.
   ... We started with proposals by Guiseppe. What is missing is
   consensus about the forbidden characters, whether it should be
   a list or regular expressions.
   ... Michael mostly wanted a list of characters, but I was
   concerned about the syntax of regular expressions. That's where
   we are.

   Yves: I kind of agree with you that the work in Microsoft in
   XLIFF covers more than forbidden characters: it is far more.
   Also, a simple list of characters would do the job for the
   things we have in mind. But if we add what Arle proposed, it
   would make things much easier, even just using the bracketed
   ranges.
   ... I think every regex engine supports that.
   ... That would be the first step, then looking at some
   additional patterns like /w, as long as we are working with
   common features.

   <fsasaki> scribeNick: fsasaki

   arle: even adding dash and brackets and inverse with the carrot
   would make it simpler, maybe that's all that's needed
   ... unicode range selectors adds a whole layer of complexity

   yves: yes, and these are not supported by all reg ex engines

   arle: correct

   <scribe> scribeNick: Arle

   Felix: If we develop a regex solution, will users then have two
   solutions. Assume we have some metadata in XLIFF, will it be
   different from the ITS solution?

   Yves: I don't think it will be an issue. Right now there is
   nothing in the XLIFF pipeline for this. I pointed to Microsoft
   only because they are using extensions with regex. I think I
   shouldn't have given that example because it opened a can of
   worms.

   Felix: jan Nelson said he would check in Microsoft about this.
   Should we wait for that with a simple regex solution?

   Yves: I don't think it hurts to wait, but I can contact Kevin
   and Yves to ask about this.

   <scribe> ACTION: Yves to contact Jan and Kevin at Microsoft to
   see what their use or regex is and whether it overlaps with
   what we do. [recorded in
   [19]http://www.w3.org/2012/07/12-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action01]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-167 - Contact Jan and Kevin at
   Microsoft to see what their use or regex is and whether it
   overlaps with what we do. [on Yves Savourel - due 2012-07-19].

quality errors

   <fsasaki> scribeNick: fsasaki

   Arle: felix and I discussed this
   ... we want to be able to point to quality definitions that are
   available in machine readable form
   ... but we don't know yet how these will look like
   ... Felix said: at this point we can just have a pointer
   ... and leave details out
   ... at DFKI we are working on defining how that should look
   like
   ... Phil's concern is probably: the information is not in the
   document

   <scribe> scribeNick: Arle

   Felix: One aspect is that if we put something with the current
   consensus in the document, I'd be worried that we have open
   value lists for things like error type, severity, or other
   aspects. I would be worried that each vendor puts in their own
   error types.
   ... InteroperabilityNow is working on concrete values, so we
   might end up with IN, ITS, and DFKI types.
   ... That is my concern if we allow anything there. We have no
   way to constrain this lacking a clear definition.

   <fsasaki> scribeNick: fsasaki

   arle: here I am coming back to the registry notion
   ... that doesn't exist yet either

   yves: the problem with the registry:
   ... it is half dynamci
   ... in some cases the user creates its own type of errors
   ... in many checker tools
   ... there is no way to cater that in a registry
   ... maybe there is need for open data for this scenario
   ... other things about the "type"
   ... we thought of having two levels of informaiton
   ... one very generic, one defined sub categories
   ... which is user definable
   ... which may have a registry
   ... if you don't understand the 2nd part, you can use the 1st
   part

   <Arle> scribeNick: Arle

   Felix: It's a bit like language tags where you have a standard
   part, but it can be extended with content at the end of the
   tag.
   ... But the question still arises, how does it relate to the
   values being created in groups like InteroperabilityNow.

   Yves: We would have to define a list that we can't change. The
   open part would allow people to have their own.

   Felix: I want to make one proposal to move forward. Let's take
   this data category into account -- it is very important -- and
   we will define local markup and take more time (until November)
   to see how much interoperability we can achieve on the XLIFF
   side and InteroperabilityNow. We need someone to work on that
   in the next months.
   ... That would be Arle, to confirm that it works with the
   values that are developed there.

   <fsasaki> scribeNick: fsasaki

   <Arle> Yves: On this topic, not necessarily on the value and
   category, I want to understand on the global rule.

   arle: after discussing between I and felix
   ... I thought it may not hurt to make it globally available,
   but don't have a strong opinion

   <Arle> scribeNick: Arle

   Yves: For everything we can implement it globally or in ITS. So
   that would be a first. So is there a good justification. If it
   doesn't happen, then using a referenced element in XLIFF, an
   ITS processor might not understand the results, even though it
   came from ITS.

   Felix: The scenario you describe is what I see, being able to
   use the category in a non-ITS namespace. For that reason, I
   think it makes sense to have a global definition. So that,
   e.g., in HTML5 its- has the same meaning as its: Then you could
   have a global rule that its-error = its:error in an XML
   serialization. Maybe it's general for HTML, but global rules
   help to simplify implementation without specific HTML5
   processors.

   Yves: One other question. You have qa-error attribute applying
   to the scope of the element it is applied to. But if I look at
   the conceptual semantics and we use a reference element with an
   inline <span> that refers to where we define the ITS elements,
   then the elements do not work because they have content that
   does not apply to the element but to the container.

   Felix: Is this specific to quality or to other things?

   Yves: It applies to everything.

   Felix: It comes up in quality due to its complexity, but we
   have other complex items, like localization note. So I'm
   wondering if we need to look at this more generally. Do we need
   more on the quality topic.

   Yves: If you say we need global rules, then that is fine.

   Felix: is it OK with you, Arle, to define local rules for now
   and take time until November to see what others are doing.

   <scribe> ACTION: Arle to follow up on quality and compatibility
   with XLIFF and Interoperability Now. [recorded in
   [20]http://www.w3.org/2012/07/12-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action02]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-168 - Follow up on quality and
   compatibility with XLIFF and Interoperability Now. [on Arle
   Lommel - due 2012-07-19].

reference topic

   Felix: We already started this, but let's come back to it.
   ... One thing I was not clear about on the thread: Yves: do you
   see this as important only to ITS or to other areas like
   language tagging as well?

   <Pedro> q Thank you Felix, I am already here

   <fsasaki> thanks

   Yves: For example, when we have non-well-formed elements that
   are broken down, then we don't say that the attributes apply to
   the content, but to the element.
   ... If we follow a namespace, we need to follow the semantics
   of the namespace.

   <scribe> ACTION: Yves to summarize the reference discussion in
   a mail. [recorded in
   [21]http://www.w3.org/2012/07/12-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action03]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-169 - Summarize the reference
   discussion in a mail. [on Yves Savourel - due 2012-07-19].

   Felix: XLIFF 2.0 is moving in the direction of this reference
   mechanism. Is this a hot topic that needs to be decided now in
   XLIFF? If we don't have it in ITS, will it keep us from
   creating XLIFF 2.0+ITS applications?

   Yves: Current thinking in XLIFF is to use references. I haven't
   explored the global rules mechanism, so maybe there is a way to
   solve it in how you define the global rules. So the short
   answer is that it is kind of important.
   ... At least to me because I don't understand how I would do it
   otherwise.

   Felix: Is there anywhere you can point to to show the XLIFF
   consensus and how XLIFF files point to external resources?

   Yves: Note that it is a consensus of the inline markup SC, not
   the whole committee.

   Felix: If nothing else, you get ten minutes of your time :-)
   ... I will be on holiday next week, so I'll have to wait until
   a week from Monday to look at what is going on.

   Pedro: I am working on some templates for documentation to the
   Commission.
   ... It will give a cover and so forth so that we are not late
   in delivering.
   ... We have a meeting on the 25th with Cocomore to close some
   things. It is a conference of the work package.

   <Yves_> bye

   <fsasaki> meeting adjourned

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Arle to follow up on quality and compatibility
   with XLIFF and Interoperability Now. [recorded in
   [22]http://www.w3.org/2012/07/12-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action02]
   [NEW] ACTION: Yves to contact Jan and Kevin at Microsoft to see
   what their use or regex is and whether it overlaps with what we
   do. [recorded in
   [23]http://www.w3.org/2012/07/12-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action01]
   [NEW] ACTION: Yves to summarize the reference discussion in a
   mail. [recorded in
   [24]http://www.w3.org/2012/07/12-mlw-lt-minutes.html#action03]

   [End of minutes]
     __________________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [25]scribe.perl version
    1.136 ([26]CVS log)
    $Date: 2012/07/12 15:08:11 $

     [25] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [26] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/



-- 
Felix Sasaki
DFKI / W3C Fellow