W3C

– DRAFT –
Internationalization Working Group Teleconference

06 May 2021

Attendees

Present
addison, Atsushi, Bert, JcK
Regrets
Fuqiao
Chair
Addison Phillips
Scribe
Bert, Bert Bos

Meeting minutes

<addison> trackbot, prepare teleconference

Agenda Review

addison: Anything to add to the agenda?

Action Items

<addison> https://www.w3.org/International/track/actions/open

<addison> action-1023?

<trackbot> action-1023: Addison Phillips to Ping fantasai about shadow dom -- due 2021-04-29 -- OPEN

<addison> close action-1023

<trackbot> Closed action-1023.

addison: I pinged Elika, will ping again.

Info Share

addison: Any info to share?

RADAR Review

<addison> https://github.com/w3c/i18n-request/projects/1

addison: No incoming review requests. Anything to discuss?

"natural language" edits

<addison> http://aphillips.github.io/charmod-norm/#terminology

<addison> https://pr-preview.s3.amazonaws.com/w3c/charmod-norm/214/6c58753...aphillips:5a88ebb.html

addison: My latest edit ^^ and the diff ^^. Any thoughts?

Bert: "0x10FFFF_16." declares base 16 twice. Too much?

addison: I think that's been there forever. :-) But I can fix it.

fsasaki: About example: Localizable and syntactic content, reference to cover image: Would the image also be localized? So an image is also localizable?

addison: I need to change the example.

r12a: Colors in defn of "resource", what is the orange text?

addison: I missed an edit, I think. Will fix.

addison: Are we happy with this terminology?

r12a: I think might work. Still looking at the diff.

addison: I moved some things around.

r12a: I think we should have a glossary document. Each document will still have definitions, but they would be copied from the glossary.

addison: Thinking of linking terms...

r12a: Link or copy.

addison: Which would be the source and which the copy?
… Could be a huge document. Specdev suffered (maybe still does) from this.

addison: Some of the terminology is specific to charmod. Not necessarily general.

r12a: We sometimes have conflicting terms in diff. documents. Central glossary can avoid that.
… Glossary can say "this term primarily used in... "

addison: Terminology I think is now the same as in ltli.

addison: So can I commit this edit?

People nodding.

addison: I'l fix the things we mentioned above.

r12a: Sounds like a plan.

<fsasaki> +1

<Bert> +1

AOB?

addison: Anything to talk about?

<r12a> https://w3c.github.io/i18n-drafts/articles/lang-bidi-use-cases/

r12a: We sent some articles out for wide review a while back. I think we should now publish them.
… I had some small comments, nothing substantive.

<r12a> https://w3c.github.io/i18n-drafts/questions/qa-direction-from-language.html

r12a: We didn't get comments on the 2nd article. So: publish?

No action item needed, r12a will just do it.

<r12a> https://github.com/w3c/i18n-drafts/projects/1

r12a: We have a pipeline for articles ^^
… It mentions the "Floating times" article. What do we do with it?

addison: It's from 2017. Probably needs a revision.
… I'll read it and if it doesn't needs tweaking we'll publish.

Action: addison: review floating times article for final publication

<trackbot> Created ACTION-1024 - Review floating times article for final publication [on Addison Phillips - due 2021-05-13].

r12a: Two articles I rewrote.

<r12a> https://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-html-dir.en

<r12a> https://www.w3.org/International/articles/inline-bidi-markup/index.en

r12a: And a third one.

<r12a> https://w3c.github.io/i18n-drafts/articles/inline-bidi-markup/index.en#staticexamples

<r12a> https://w3c.github.io/i18n-drafts/questions/qa-html-dir.en

(The www.w3.org links are the wrong ones. The w3c.github.io links are right.)

<r12a> https://w3c.github.io/i18n-drafts/articles/inline-bidi-markup/bidi_examples

r12a: I'd like to publish them in the new form.

addison: These have not had wide review? Do they need it?

r12a: The qa-html-dir is rewritten and has new stuff, e.g., logical [CSS] properties. The other is not much changed.

addison: So publish the latter and put the other in wide review?
… Should the WG review them first?

r12a: I'm fine either way.

fsasaki: Some links are broken.

r12a: Yes, some links should work and some known not to work.
… so I'll send structural markup article for wide review and publish the other two.

material to enhance the language matrix with guidance what features are needed for a given language - "how tos" per language?

fsasaki: I went through the matrix material with students, to let the students try and understand what is need for a language. E.g., vertical layout not so important for European language, but important for others.
… maybe there could be a flag to indicate if a feature is relevant for a language.
… Maybe that's not so much a technical topic, but could be a help for users of the materal. That's feedback the students gave.

<r12a> https://www.w3.org/TR/typography/

<r12a> https://w3c.github.io/sealreq/home

r12a: The matrix is a summary. This document ^^ should help explain it.
… The document for a script will say which are the features to look out for.

<r12a> https://r12a.github.io/scripts/featurelist/

r12a: But we don't have enough resources to write them. Maybe you'll like this ^^ featurelist .

fsasaki: yes

<r12a> https://r12a.github.io/scripts/lao/

r12a: The Lao gap analysis links to other sources. But they are not W3C resources.
… They are done in my spare time.
… Open to suggestions to make things better.

fsasaki: Thanks for the pointers. I wasn't aware of those. So it may be a question of how to navigate to the resources.

addison: Maybe you should ask your students to contribute :-)

r12a: A question I've had a for a long time: Should we point people to my stuff? It addresses much of your question.

addison: The WG could review it, if you want. Maybe we need a process for receiving contributions, from r12a, but also others.

<fsasaki> r12a's script documents are an excellent resource that address the student's needs

<r12a> https://r12a.github.io/scripts/#scriptnotes

r12a: My article is a living document, not easily copiable. So can we point people to my material?

fsasaki: I'd say go for it.

<r12a> https://www.w3.org/TR/typography/

addison: Process to vet it doesn't have to be super elaborate.

r12a: We have a place to put such links.

fsasaki: I think the pointers are very helpful for my students.

Bert: I'd also say link to r12a's material. Just state what the status of the link is.

r12a: There would probably some 40 links.

<r12a> https://www.w3.org/TR/typography/#text_decoration

addison: Group them in a kind of "link farm"?

r12a: ^^ this has a section with links like that.
… The "requirements" subsection has topic links. We could organize it differently. No need to have just one link per item.

addison: Think about linking to general information. There are examples already, like the Bhutan links from Netflix.

Action: richard: look at the typography index and determine a way to point to other (outside) documents

addison: Linking seems valuable. Don't omit it just because it is all by r12a. No need to bring it all into W3C.

<trackbot> Created ACTION-1025 - Look at the typography index and determine a way to point to other (outside) documents [on Richard Ishida - due 2021-05-13].

Summary of action items

  1. addison: review floating times article for final publication
  2. richard: look at the typography index and determine a way to point to other (outside) documents
Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 131 (Sat Apr 24 15:23:43 2021 UTC).

Diagnostics

Succeeded: s/addresses/address/

No scribenick or scribe found. Guessed: Bert

Maybe present: fsasaki, r12a