– DRAFT –
Internationalization (I18N) WG - TPAC 2023 - Tuesday

Today's Live Schedule

<addison> https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/wiki/2023-TPAC-Planning

<addison> **Note well: meeting with RDF is at 10:30, not 9:30**

Today

reviews needs-attention issues

<addison_> https://github.com/w3c/i18n-activity/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Aneeds-attention

<addison_> w3c/i18n-activity#1361

<addison_> w3c/adapt#175

addison_: this spec also links to the HTML autocomplete attribute
… I could try to reopen this issue
… I'll mark this as repoen

<addison_> w3c/i18n-activity#1358

addison_: this issue is open
… it's about RTL named group support in URLPattern

w3c/i18n-activity#1368

xfq: we have two tracker issues, 1358 and 1368

addison_: will close 1358

<addison_> w3c/i18n-activity#1038

addison_: there's a request at the bottom of it

r12a: I'm not sure if it's a tatweel or a hyphen

xfq: when browsers implement this, should they use tatweel or hyphen?

r12a: no conclusion in the Unicode Consortium yet
… we had a discussion not long ago, and another discussion about N'Ko
… for N'Ko the conlsusion was to use the N'Ko character
… this is a soft hyphen
… I think this should use tatweel
… this is just an example
… I'll reply to Florian

<addison_> w3c/i18n-activity#1037

<addison_> w3c/csswg-drafts#5972

addison_: CSSWG rejected it
… and the question is whether if r12a is satisfied

r12a: I don't know whether that's a valid distinction or not

<r12a> https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/text-level-semantics.html#the-wbr-element

Bert: use word-break for long URLs
… I don't expect hyphens in that case

addison_: is that intentional?

r12a: the HTML example is better for soft hyphens rather than wbr
… the HTML spec says the wbr element represents a line break opportunity
… it doesn't say "a line break opportunity without hyphenation"

Bert: if you put the style in the wbr element itself, it doesn't do anything
… you have to put it in the element outside

addison_: should we make it a needs-resolution issue?

r12a: I think so
… there's no problem if you're using this approach if you use it for URLs
… if you try to click or copy and paste it it will work

<addison_> whatwg/html#6326

Bert: and that's why I use wbr

<addison_> w3c/i18n-activity#980

<addison_> w3c/i18n-activity#894

r12a: I think 894 should be closed

Meeting with RDF-*

<addison> see their notes

<addison> https://www.w3.org/2023/09/12-rdf-star-irc#T08-33-10

ACTION: richard to follow up on the bidi thread of rdf-star

<gb> Cannot create action. Validation failed. Maybe richard is not a valid user for w3c/i18n-actions?

<addison> gb, richard is r12a

ACTION: richard to follow up on the bidi thread of rdf-star

<gb> Created action #44

APA WG meeting

<addison> Location: Ultera, 1st floor

<addison> https://www.w3.org/2023/09/12-apa-irc#T09-43-49

review CSS issues for thursday

<addison> https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/wiki/2023-TPAC-Planning#proposed-css-joint-agenda

https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/projects/39

w3c/i18n-actions#11

w3c/i18n-actions#10

<addison> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/projects/39

https://github.com/w3c/i18n-activity/projects/3

w3c/alreq#220

<r12a> sideways tests: https://www.w3.org/International/i18n-tests/results/int-vertical-text.html#dutch

w3c/clreq#243

<r12a> w3c/jlreq#318

<addison> https://github.com/w3c/i18n-actions/wiki/2023-TPAC-Planning#proposed-css-joint-agenda

https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/

WCAG

<addison> https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/8f9736a7-09f1-4133-b3f0-3800f777a5fb/

<addison> email sent to wcag

<addison> (discussing what else to accomplish today)

<addison> (pinging wcag)

<addison> (chat-chatting with css)

<addison> (introductions with fatima)