IRC log of i18ncore on 2006-12-12

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:42:12 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #i18ncore
14:42:12 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2006/12/12-i18ncore-irc
14:42:20 [fsasaki]
meeting: i18n core Working Group
14:42:23 [fsasaki]
chair: Francois
14:42:27 [fsasaki]
scribe: Felix
14:42:31 [fsasaki]
scribeNick: fsasaki
14:42:43 [fsasaki]
agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2006Dec/0012.html
14:42:50 [fsasaki]
rrsagent, make log public
14:59:23 [MickM]
MickM has joined #i18ncore
14:59:34 [Zakim]
I18N_CoreWG()10:00AM has now started
14:59:41 [Zakim]
+ +1.408.404.aaaa
15:00:01 [fyergeau]
fyergeau has joined #i18ncore
15:00:36 [Zakim]
+Michael
15:00:48 [Zakim]
+Felix
15:01:01 [Zakim]
+[IPcaller]
15:01:06 [fyergeau]
zakim, [ is fyergeau
15:01:07 [Zakim]
+fyergeau; got it
15:03:13 [fsasaki]
topic: action items
15:03:28 [fsasaki]
topic: last minutes
15:03:32 [fsasaki]
approved
15:03:44 [fsasaki]
action: Felix to ask for an extension for CSS 2.1 review (DONE)
15:03:55 [fsasaki]
action: Felix to gather pointers for Michael about W3C in general ... (DONE)
15:04:08 [fsasaki]
action: Felix to go back to Bjoern saying Martins mail is a WG answer (DONE)
15:04:26 [r12a]
r12a has joined #i18ncore
15:04:34 [r12a]
zakim, dial richard-home please
15:04:34 [Zakim]
ok, r12a; the call is being made
15:04:35 [Zakim]
+Richard
15:04:38 [fsasaki]
francois: got a reply from Bjoern, might want to discuss it later
15:04:56 [fsasaki]
action: Felix to go back to the WG finally (DONE)
15:05:17 [fsasaki]
action: Felix to write a mail about possibility for SVG tiny specific IRI tests to martin and the i18n core list (PENDING)
15:05:56 [fsasaki]
action: Francois to have a look at issue 3698 and gather information on options for diacrictics in collations (ONGOING)
15:06:26 [fsasaki]
francois: so far, found oracle collation which has some parameterization
15:06:39 [fsasaki]
.. for those collations, diacritics are not independent of case
15:08:09 [fsasaki]
action: All to read Martins comments on IDNA issues (ONGOING)
15:09:01 [fsasaki]
action: Felix to see what has to be updated on tutorial material for IDNA issues
15:09:23 [fsasaki]
note of martin http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2006Oct/0013.html
15:10:09 [fsasaki]
felix: let's drop AI 7, I do AI 8
15:10:20 [fsasaki]
action: Felix to to classify open LTLI issues (DONE)
15:10:32 [fsasaki]
action: Francois to build a current issues list on charmod norm (PENDING)
15:10:43 [fsasaki]
action: Francois to give input to wiki for the LTLI summary (ONGOING)
15:10:55 [fsasaki]
francois: update from Mark, Felix updated LTLI draft later
15:12:27 [fsasaki]
action: Francois to review InkML LC draft (PENDING)
15:12:40 [fsasaki]
felix: LC is until 18 December
15:12:53 [fsasaki]
richard: we talk on tuesday, and see if we need an extension
15:13:04 [fsasaki]
action: Richard to find out what is the canonical URI for BCP47 (ONGOING)
15:13:27 [fsasaki]
richard: got various URIs from the IETF, Philippe Le Hegaret (IETF Liaison from W3C) is working on it
15:14:51 [fsasaki]
topic: IDNA issue update
15:14:59 [fsasaki]
francois: concluded during AI review
15:15:05 [fsasaki]
topic: IRI tests for XML Schema
15:17:52 [fsasaki]
felix describes the mail http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-i18n-core/2006Dec/0011.html
15:18:08 [fsasaki]
francois: testing resolving is good
15:18:53 [fsasaki]
.. but just to have a test to verify that IRI does not blow up everything would be good
15:19:09 [fsasaki]
.. validating a document that contains an instance of anyURI
15:19:15 [fsasaki]
.. is necessary as well
15:19:51 [r12a]
zakim, who's here ?
15:19:51 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Ienup, Michael, Felix, fyergeau, Richard
15:19:52 [Zakim]
On IRC I see r12a, fyergeau, MickM, RRSAgent, Zakim, fsasaki
15:20:04 [fsasaki]
.. i.e. positive tests
15:20:51 [fsasaki]
action: Felix to go back to schema people with our test ideas for XML schema anyURI
15:21:06 [fsasaki]
topic: XQuery full text review - udpate?
15:21:29 [fsasaki]
felix: postpone to next week, let's look at it next week
15:21:37 [fsasaki]
topic: LTLI update
15:24:55 [fsasaki]
richard: BP statements should be first, explanations later
15:25:32 [fsasaki]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-core/2006OctDec/0026.html
15:25:42 [fsasaki]
- What topic is *not* covered by the document yet? By "covered" I don't
15:25:44 [fsasaki]
mean that the text about the topic is completely finished, but that the
15:25:45 [fsasaki]
topic has a - more or less filled - place in the document.
15:25:47 [fsasaki]
- Do you agree with the general structure of the document?
15:26:17 [fsasaki]
- I have integrated best practices statements in each subsection of sec. 3
15:26:18 [fsasaki]
(except sec. 3.6, not done yet), and in sec. 4. Do you agree with this
15:26:20 [fsasaki]
approach? Should we get rid of the normative statements in sec. 6, or sec.
15:26:21 [fsasaki]
6 as a whole?
15:28:07 [fsasaki]
richard: feels strange to have both BP and conformance statements
15:28:18 [fsasaki]
.. with only BP, we don't have power to enforce s.t.
15:28:42 [fsasaki]
francois: TAG document has a lot of wheight, with only BP
15:30:55 [fsasaki]
richard: we need to think if we want to demote sec. 6 by calling the other stuff BP
15:31:06 [fsasaki]
.. not sure if that is good
15:31:29 [fsasaki]
.. if everything is BP, but sec. 6 is important for people to do
15:31:34 [fsasaki]
.. that is difficult
15:31:57 [fsasaki]
francois: difficult to have both normative and BP statements
15:32:16 [fsasaki]
.. the web arch has BP statements, but also refers to RFC 2119
15:32:29 [fsasaki]
.. so they make the BP statements normative
15:32:52 [fsasaki]
richard: no, I consider BP statements like in Geo. Here, "should" clarifiers the language only
15:33:28 [fsasaki]
.. the conformance section should say "if you develop specs at W3C, you need to take the following into account: ..."
15:33:40 [fsasaki]
francois: the web arch does not have that, I think
15:35:10 [fsasaki]
.. for LTLI we want to have some normative statements to use within w3c
15:35:27 [fsasaki]
francois: for LTLI, we also say s.t. how to identify locales
15:36:12 [fsasaki]
"* Core of a locale: language (mostly). No need (or ability) for LTLI to define the rest."
15:36:22 [fsasaki]
from http://esw.w3.org/topic/i18nLTLI
15:37:13 [fsasaki]
francois: we can say normatively "use a language identifier (BCP 47) as the core of the locale"
15:37:32 [fsasaki]
.. editorial thing: difference between CLDR and LDML
15:37:49 [fsasaki]
.. there is also an ISO thing about locale
15:38:00 [fsasaki]
action: francois to look after ISO locale related spec
15:40:48 [fsasaki]
general agreement that normative statement about language identifier (BCP 47) as the core of the locale would be valuable in LTLI
15:43:07 [fsasaki]
richard: need to change "RFC 4646" to "... or its successor"
15:43:47 [fsasaki]
action: felix to update LTLI with "or its successor " statements
15:44:33 [fsasaki]
action: all to give feedback on LTLI update
15:45:05 [fsasaki]
topic: PLS comments
15:45:23 [r12a]
http://www.w3.org/Search/Mail/Team/search?type-index=w3t&index-type=t&keywords=%27Canonical%27+URI+for+BCP+47+&search=Search
15:45:35 [r12a]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-core/2006OctDec/0024.html
15:46:03 [fsasaki]
richard: a number of comments and my take on whose
15:46:21 [fsasaki]
r 103-7
15:46:25 [fsasaki]
s/r/R/
15:48:00 [fsasaki]
R 103-20
15:48:11 [fsasaki]
richard: we should try to get them to reference to BCP 47
15:48:21 [fsasaki]
.. we hope to provide the right URI within a week or so
15:48:42 [fsasaki]
francois: so "at least update rfc 4646, and please BCP 47"
15:48:56 [fsasaki]
R103-21
15:49:29 [fsasaki]
richard: should remove dc:language example, it's confusing
15:49:32 [fsasaki]
francois: yes
15:50:02 [fsasaki]
R103-30
15:50:20 [fsasaki]
(later)
15:50:25 [fsasaki]
R103-45
15:50:41 [fsasaki]
francois: fine
15:50:55 [fsasaki]
R103-36
15:52:14 [fsasaki]
<lexeme role="mypos:noun">
15:52:41 [r12a]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-core/2006OctDec/0024.html
15:52:48 [fsasaki]
francois: shorthand for the concatenation of namespace URI and verb
15:52:54 [fsasaki]
.. do they define it?
15:53:10 [fsasaki]
richard: don't think so. Also: is it normal to have this as an attribute value?
15:53:23 [fsasaki]
francois: yes, you could say: it is an XPath with one component
15:54:43 [fsasaki]
.. there is a new spec which has a name for this
15:55:29 [fsasaki]
.. they should prefer to s.t. to justify the usage
15:56:11 [fsasaki]
richard: it is a little confusing
15:56:27 [fsasaki]
francois: it is called CURIEs
15:57:45 [fsasaki]
richard: will go back to them asking to explain how their mechanism works, or use a simpler examply
15:57:59 [fsasaki]
R103-26
15:58:09 [fsasaki]
(fine)
15:58:16 [fsasaki]
R103-33
15:58:33 [fsasaki]
richard: don't see the expansion, otherwise I'm fine
15:59:03 [fsasaki]
R103-30
15:59:12 [fsasaki]
richard: they are not having markup for bidi
15:59:27 [fsasaki]
.. they say "people can use the unicode control characters"
15:59:32 [fsasaki]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-core/2006OctDec/0025.html
16:00:37 [Zakim]
-Felix
16:01:05 [Zakim]
+Felix
16:10:38 [Zakim]
-Michael
16:10:42 [Zakim]
-Ienup
16:11:40 [Zakim]
-fyergeau
16:11:43 [Zakim]
-Felix
16:11:50 [Zakim]
-Richard
16:11:52 [Zakim]
I18N_CoreWG()10:00AM has ended
16:11:54 [Zakim]
Attendees were +1.408.404.aaaa, Michael, Felix, [IPcaller], fyergeau, Ienup, Richard
16:12:25 [fsasaki]
present: Felix, Francois, Ienup, Michael, Richard
16:12:33 [fsasaki]
regrets: Karunesh, Vijay
16:12:38 [fsasaki]
rrsagent,draft minutes
16:12:38 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/12/12-i18ncore-minutes.html fsasaki
17:23:48 [r12a]
r12a has left #i18ncore
18:24:26 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #i18ncore