See also: IRC log
<r12a> prashant, will you join the call?
<prashant> i am available through IRC only
http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/open
<fsasaki> my action items still not done, please keep open as usual, sorry
action-252?
<trackbot> action-252 -- Felix Sasaki to Ping dita folks about contacting html5 about ruby progress -- due 2013-09-05 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/252
addison: we published charmod-norm
<DavidC> Great
JcK: are you all aware of the
"hamza above" controversy
... in unicode description of hamza differs
"bet with hamza above" doesn't decompose to bet plus hamza
JcK: discussion in IAB I18N
group
... ID starting Monday
<scribe> ACTION: JcK: send link to "hamza above" ID to public list [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/07/17-i18n-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-320 - Send link to "hamza above" id to public list [on John Klensin - due 2014-07-24].
richard: changed charmod-norm
before publishing it
... only editorial changes
... mainly section 2
addison: did a few more minor edits
https://www.w3.org/International/wiki/Review_radar
http://www.w3cindia.in/Indic-req-draft/Indic-layout-requirements.html
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2014Jul/0007.html
richard: they have issued a new
version
... (scrabbles around for a link)
... suggest that we publish a FPWD
... and provide some guidance to the TF
<prashant> aphillip, revised has already being uploded at http://w3cindia.in/Indic-req-draft/Revised-Indic-layout-requirements.html
<r12a> http://w3cindia.in/Indic-req-draft/Revised-Indic-layout-requirements.html
<prashant> this is the latest version
richard: propose that they use a
stable link for editor's draft
... propose that they port to ReSpec
... and stablize heads
... remove screen snaps
<prashant> ok
richard: suggest using TTWF
framework instead of screen shots?
... and perhaps make document more generic
addison: yes, not focused strictly on CSS
richard: publish a document with general requirements and then publish recommendations
<prashant> aphillip: we will update the revised document as suggested
richard: latin text & chinese groups doing
similar
... some additional information not yet in document
<prashant> sorry, call is not available right now
richard: need to do a more formal/complete review as a WG
<prashant> ok will made the changes and circulate it into the Indic mailing list
<scribe> ACTION: richard: follow up with prashant on what we discussed about preparing Indic document for FPWD [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/07/17-i18n-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-321 - Follow up with prashant on what we discussed about preparing indic document for fpwd [on Richard Ishida - due 2014-07-24].
<prashant> ok i will get in touch with Richard
richard: comments to public-i18n-indic
<prashant> and follow his instructions for fpwd
richard: discussion about how to
have the discussion?
... work through each item and decide if "resolved"?
... Anne has responded to some
addison: so we said we'd review, de-dupe, and file bugzilla tickets
https://www.w3.org/International/track/products/25
richard: not just forward to Anne, but try to encourage Anne to work forward to a conclusion
issue-149?
<trackbot> issue-149 -- Code point definition -- open
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/International/track/issues/149
close issue-149
<trackbot> Closed issue-149.
issue-150?
<trackbot> issue-150 -- User agents must not support any other encodings or labels. -- open
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/International/track/issues/150
richard: I'm satisfied on
issue-149
... 150 is old, perhaps very old
JcK: would declare many
interfaces based on GB code to invalid
... may impact other protocols that depend on other encodings
or labels
richard: understand where Anne's coming from
JcK: might merit a SHOULD avoid if at all possible
richard: can you write a
follow-up email?
... probably need to extend 150
<r12a> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-core/2012JanMar/0101.html
addison: encoding may only apply to interpreting bytes
JcK: if there exist
Unicode-incompatible encodings "in the wild"
... patches to support those scripts/encodings/countries may be
banned from the internet
addison: may want to suggest
explanatory text to accompany the "strong statement"
... might want to have a separate document we publish that
explains
<r12a> http://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-choosing-encodings.en
issue-151?
<trackbot> issue-151 -- This algorithm is different from the one defined in section 1.4 of Unicode Technical Standard #22 -- open
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/International/track/issues/151
richard: comment is moot
... I am satisfied
close issue-151
<trackbot> Closed issue-151.
issue-152?
<trackbot> issue-152 -- New content and formats must exclusively use the utf-8 encoding -- open
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/International/track/issues/152
<somnath> hi
addison: will write a constructive suggestion about issue-152
richard: extend next week's telecon to get through all items?
JcK: at IETF next week
next week: half hour longer
<scribe> ACTION: richard: ping martin about test availability and timing [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/07/17-i18n-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-322 - Ping martin about test availability and timing [on Richard Ishida - due 2014-07-24].