HTTP/2 200 date: Wed, 08 Oct 2025 14:34:47 GMT content-type: text/plain content-length: 20815 cf-ray: 98b65c6e9f49c1ae-BLR content-location: 23-mlw-lt-irc.txt vary: negotiate,accept,accept-charset,Accept-Encoding,Origin tcn: choice last-modified: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 17:21:41 GMT etag: "1093a-4d3f7ed739340;602037f93ee54 cache-control: max-age=21600 expires: Wed, 08 Oct 2025 20:34:47 GMT content-encoding: gzip access-control-allow-origin: * x-backend: www-mirrors x-request-id: 98b65c6e9f49c1ae strict-transport-security: max-age=15552000; includeSubdomains; preload content-security-policy: frame-ancestors 'self' https://cms.w3.org/ https://cms-dev.w3.org/; upgrade-insecure-requests cf-cache-status: BYPASS accept-ranges: bytes set-cookie: __cf_bm=19KyMpHfogjvOE9myJDo6FbO1jy5kOav89ZfannAjyM-1759934087-1.0.1.1-jkUFQRvfJ6nS4HAyij_CvaOI3ie62ZBZY4d2f9EEn6qPRxqefEIxrhGIFlgoUARxf6k43nUQAfDiGTIiPuo3HLIqiRIkPlyGSqE0ZuqHWPU; path=/; expires=Wed, 08-Oct-25 15:04:47 GMT; domain=.w3.org; HttpOnly; Secure; SameSite=None server: cloudflare alt-svc: h3=":443"; ma=86400 07:34:02 RRSAgent has joined #mlw-lt 07:34:02 logging to https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-irc 07:34:09 meeting: MLW-LT f2f 07:34:11 chair: felix 07:34:20 agenda: https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/PragueJan2013f2f#Agenda 07:34:37 topic: role call 07:34:45 checking attendance ... 07:34:49 present+ fsasaki 07:34:59 Zakim has joined #mlw-lt 07:35:12 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html fsasaki 07:36:12 s/role/roll/ 07:36:13 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html fsasaki 07:57:55 tadej has joined #mlw-lt 07:59:58 fsasaki has joined #mlw-lt 08:00:40 Yves_ has joined #mlw-lt 08:00:47 present+ Yves 08:00:57 daveL has joined #mlw-lt 08:01:07 Marcis has joined #mlw-lt 08:01:14 present+ Marcis 08:01:23 Ankit has joined #mlw-lt 08:01:23 leroy has joined #mlw-lt 08:01:29 Arle has joined #mlw-lt 08:01:31 present+ leroy 08:01:35 present+ Ankit 08:01:41 present+ Arle 08:01:43 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html fsasaki 08:06:37 topic: https://tinyurl.com/its20-comments-handling 08:06:41 truedesheim has joined #mlw-lt 08:06:48 present+ dave 08:07:17 Jirka has joined #mlw-lt 08:08:01 https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/PragueJan2013f2f#Agenda 08:09:21 pnietoca has joined #mlw-lt 08:09:21 mdelolmo has joined #mlw-lt 08:09:30 present+ pnietoca 08:09:31 scribe daveL 08:09:37 present+ mdelolmo 08:09:39 topic: issue-67 08:10:09 yves: had no feedback from shaun to date so we probabl can't advance here 08:10:37 related: https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/105 08:10:48 kfritsche has joined #mlw-lt 08:11:03 present+ Karl 08:12:00 felix: comment could be addressed by dropping the ref to XML schema 08:13:05 yves: will respond on issue 105 08:13:14 topic: issue-69 08:13:23 related: https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/69 08:14:20 External rules may also have links to other external rules (see example 20). The linking mechanism is recursive, and subsequently after the processing the rules MUST be read top-down (see example 21). 08:14:24 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html fsasaki 08:14:50 https://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#link-external-rules 08:14:58 pablo: had responded that this was clear in the specification, but suggest a clarification 08:15:19 the section is 5.4. (last paragraph) 08:15:23 felix: confirms this is just a clarification 08:15:26 change it 08:15:47 "The linking mechanism is recursive" > "The linking mechanism is recursive in a depth-first approach" 08:16:01 tadej: perhaps explain this recursion as being 'depth first' to be understandable more by computer scientists 08:17:04 topic: issue-70 08:17:20 related: https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/70 08:18:09 felix: ref to section 5.5 08:18:14 https://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#selection-precedence 08:20:31 will add one entry between "global selections" and "data category defaults" for inherited information, but not specific to local markup 08:20:45 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html fsasaki 08:20:56 kfritsche has joined #mlw-lt 08:21:00 topic: issue-71 08:21:04 related: https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/71 08:21:21 annotatorsRef 08:21:24 scribe: fsasaki 08:22:09 daveL: Yves said the problem is: you can have a lot of annotatorRefs 08:22:28 .. issue is: how to deal with annotatorRefs with two instances of local standoff markup 08:22:37 .. e.g. lq localization issues and provenacne records 08:22:54 .. so you can have multiple records of the same data category applying to the same selection 08:23:09 .. you don't get the information whether the information comes from different processes 08:23:36 .. Yves suggested whether we can put the information into the same ... 08:23:49 .. my view was: for provenacne annotator ref is not that important 08:24:19 .. so in the mail last night: could we exlude the lqi and provenance from annotatorsRef 08:24:34 .. annotatorRefs is telling you what provided the provenacne annotation 08:24:55 tadej: from provenance it is not needed, but for lqi? 08:28:08 dave: don't think so for lqissue. 08:28:35 yves: sounds weird: have annotatorsRef mandatory for some data cats, possible for others, forbidden for two ... 08:28:58 .. currently it is required for mt-confidence and disambiguation 08:29:21 ... and Terminology 08:29:26 yves: otehr solution: you could have it mandatory for these two data categories, and don't have it for others 08:29:36 .. that would make things a lot simpler 08:30:03 dave: agree - not having two features interacting (standoff and annotatorsRef) would be good 08:31:32 Milan has joined #mlw-lt 08:33:47 felix potential resolution - so keep it mandatory for mt-confidence, disambiguation and term, and edit the list of data category items in the spec 08:34:49 scribe: daveL 08:36:47 action: dLewis6 to come back to chase and kevin about discussion of issue-71 https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-irc#T08-34-49 08:36:48 Created ACTION-388 - Come back to chase and kevin about discussion of issue-71 https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-irc#T08-34-49 [on David Lewis - due 2013-01-30]. 08:38:29 action: felix to change example https://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#EX-its-tool-annotation-1 if the agree on issue-71 , see discussion at https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-irc#T08-34-49 08:38:29 Created ACTION-389 - Change example https://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#EX-its-tool-annotation-1 if the agree on issue-71 , see discussion at https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-irc#T08-34-49 [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30]. 08:39:32 swalter has joined #mlw-lt 08:40:00 present+ swalter 08:41:02 felix: example 28 needs to be revised also, will do this now 08:45:39 dF has joined #mlw-lt 08:46:33 present+ dF 08:49:37 scribe: fsasaki 08:49:56 daveL: using the example in the test file - should we have usage of the data categories in the elements? 08:49:58 yves: yes 08:51:35 dave: this example doesn't actually include the data category attributes to which the annotatorRef refers 08:52:00 felix: makes note that the test file and the example should be revised to include this 08:52:28 yves: we don't have annotatorsRef for all disambiguation examples 08:52:46 yves: we don't have annotatorRef in all examples of disambiguation 08:53:15 action: tadej to check disambiguation examples with regards to presence of annotatorsRef 08:53:15 Created ACTION-390 - Check disambiguation examples with regards to presence of annotatorsRef [on Tadej Štajner - due 2013-01-30]. 08:55:13 topic: ISSUE-72 NIF comment 08:55:32 felix: comment was which version of NIF do we refer to 08:55:40 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0015.html 08:55:55 .. there are 1.0 and 2.0 08:56:08 .. also there stabilit was raises 08:57:21 ... and Christian also raised whether the mapping was canonical 08:58:19 dF: it may be a useful clarification for implementators 08:58:46 felix: but its not clear what is meant by 'canonical XML' in this case 08:59:34 tadej: it implied there should be a canonical XML serialisation 09:00:56 felix: would such a requirement raise a bar for implementors, this need to be dicussed further on the lists 09:01:48 felix: now will attempt to dial in Christian 09:04:36 rrsagent, draft minutes 09:04:36 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html Yves_ 09:08:11 topic: issue-68 09:08:17 scribe: fsasaki 09:08:54 marcis: there was a discussion on ITS term and disambiguation 09:09:05 chriLi has joined #mlw-lt 09:09:08 .. christian brought it up, various comments from the WG 09:09:34 .. david suggested that we should not break ITS1.0, but felix said it is not necessary to have it 09:09:46 marcis: summarises discussion 09:10:06 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0152.html 09:10:15 daveF: don't break it if it works 09:10:22 .. that's the bottom line 09:10:41 .. we want to keep also independence of features 09:10:58 marcis: I could implement terminology independent of the rest of disambiugation 09:11:13 .. the question is: if we agree to change something, it is independent, so different question 09:11:30 .. david suggested to have a bp document that specifies how things relate 09:11:44 daveF: there are seperate use cases for disambiguation and terminology 09:12:02 .. things are backed by different use cases, also from the implementers point of view 09:12:56 felix: we can also depcreate one of these 09:13:09 tadej: if we want to annotate the same fragment - which one to choose? 09:13:14 marcis: that is the biggest problem 09:13:21 .. we cannot do both 09:13:54 marcis: there was a comment from yves, we should break larger problems into smaller ones 09:14:20 .. so even if we have an "upper level" data category which we could then use for both scenarios 09:14:51 tadej: we could use the same trip we did with annotators ref, e.g. using multiple values in the same attribute 09:15:03 .. not sure if we would encourage people to do this 09:15:16 .. complex, but same level of complexity as ... 09:15:57 tadej: another solution tadej suggested was to have many attributes , but that's the same as having everything in one attribute 09:16:10 .. if we can come up with a closed set of types of annotation, that's a solution 09:16:23 .. but that needs to be a closed set, since we are specifying attributes 09:16:48 .. right now for disambiguation we agreed for three levels: concept, entity, lexicon 09:17:10 marcis: there is no definition for each of these levels, e.g. what is a lexical concept? 09:17:20 .. I saw that there is a terminology inconcistency 09:17:34 .. terminology is not used always in the same way in the disambiguation description 09:18:07 daveL: the issue in using both of them for the same term - we are not clear how to combine them? 09:18:16 tadej: it is not an issue at the moment 09:18:34 .. if you fold it in one data category, it becomes a problem 09:18:51 queue 09:19:13 q+ 09:19:45 daveF: a big system will have a terminology life cycle with many manual people, but it is an automatic workflow 09:20:09 daveL: aim of disambiguation is that it would make the output of automatic annotation available 09:20:21 ack c 09:20:51 christian: thanks to marcis for putting everything into a condensed form 09:21:08 .. there are we with the discussion today: my understanding is the following: 09:21:45 .. people think it is not a bad idea to try to come up with a data category that can subsume what ITS2 terminology and ITS2 disambiguation try to cover 09:22:05 .. with respect to paying attention to ITS1: situation is that there is no need to go for backwards compatibility 09:22:17 .. one way to achive soft transition would be to deprecate existing ITS term 09:22:32 s/achive/achieve/ 09:23:00 .. one way to come up with the upper level data category: two implementation suggestions were made: based on attrbiute values and distinct values for annotation types 09:23:01 q+ 09:23:18 .. this is how I understand the current state of the discussion 09:23:31 .. I'm wondering what the next step would be 09:23:46 .. to say: we realize that we want to really look into this change 09:23:55 .. and want to do something to the current draft 09:24:15 .. if this wants to be driven it could be done via mail or a seperate call 09:24:27 .. need to agree on the approach 09:24:35 ack fsa 09:24:56 scrie: daveL 09:25:12 scribe: daveL 09:25:40 felix: we have agreement that backward compatability isn't an absolute barrier 09:25:54 ... but it is in my view desirable 09:26:01 Christian: fully agree 09:26:37 felix: another point is trying in general to reduce level of substantive change 09:26:57 felix: another point is experience of people who implement and knwo users of its1.0 terminology 09:27:11 ... such as yves and OKAPI community 09:27:49 yves: not necessarily a big problem to change but would like to keep backward compatibility in general 09:28:08 rrsagent, draft minutes 09:28:08 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html Yves_ 09:28:12 tadej: suggested changes would break backward compatibility 09:29:14 macis: potetnially we add complexity to terminology by including link to external ontology or other lexical resource 09:29:23 df: agrees 09:30:46 felix: compromise is having an umbrella data category, and allow term to stay the same 09:31:02 q+ 09:31:18 ack ch 09:31:23 arle: agre with marcis 09:31:28 s/agre/agree/ 09:31:37 marcis: have some questionns about the definition of disambiguation, e.g. the meaning of what is a lexical concept 09:32:23 christian: support having an umbrella data category that would not increase complexity of seaprate term and disambiguation use case 09:33:24 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html fsasaki 09:33:25 ... also we will get better uptake if we can offer an easier route to marking up the output of text analysis 09:33:51 ... rather than having to support the more complex issues in disambiguation 09:34:38 present+ christan(for10-11-call) 09:34:40 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html fsasaki 09:35:23 tadej: the reason for defining granularities was the major requirements of linguists, it was not sufficient to have this all in the target external data structure 09:35:47 ... so even granularity definition was a compromise 09:36:03 arle: the term 'granularity' may also be an issue 09:36:43 tadej: was previously 'disambiguation type', but it was difficult to find the right term 09:37:39 felxi: asks tadej, marcis, christan to come up with a proposal that allows for both use cases and consider backward comatibility for term? 09:37:57 ... but this would need to be done by the end of next week? 09:39:07 Without putting too much thought into it, would disambiguationClassType work? Would this always correspond to a description of the kind of disambiguationClass intended? 09:39:49 christian: happy to let marcis and tadej to try and draft something over these two days and then I can dial in again to discuss it further 09:40:04 marcis: asks who was originator of disambig 09:41:38 tadej: originally it was a named entity recoginiser category, but after discussion also became merged with diasambiguation afteter discussion with linguasev and others 09:42:29 marcis: could we have a cascading model, since named entity can be composite 09:43:56 Don't forget to bring the beer bottles to the room as well :-) 09:44:02 daveL: note this overlaps with issue-109 on disambiguation in indic languages 09:44:22 topic: issue-75 09:44:34 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0143.html 09:45:02 felix: jorge as shepard has produced a summary of this topic 09:45:25 christian: my domain comment had three parts 09:46:20 .. one main point - was looking for a way for providing to meta-data on a domain without pointing to resource, this has no eyyt been resolved 09:46:41 ... another point was that domain meta-data is processor specific 09:47:24 ... so in one world it is called x then the context in which x is meaningful needs to be provided 09:47:57 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0136.html 09:48:08 ... now jorge has resolved point 2b, but the baove has still also to be resolved 09:49:12 felix: felt adding this context meta was a new feature but could be reolved with a note that this relates to a single engine use case 09:50:09 https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/products/9 09:50:13 christian; broadly agrees such a note would satisfy him, since in ITS the focus was on scenarios with a single engine scenario. But this need to be made clear as an assumption in ITS2.0 09:50:44 felix: have now started collacting items on tracker categories as 'not addressed in ITS2.0' 09:51:54 topic: issue-73 09:51:55 ... so if larger implementors, e.g. sap, adobe, ms, will but resoruces into the multiengine scenario we could consider it, other we should stick with making explicit the single engine context 09:52:23 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0015.html 09:53:03 felix: with NIF the stability is an issue and will refer back to sebastian Helleman about the plan for this 09:53:17 ... need this information to react fully to this comment 09:54:00 .. other comment was how the mapping could benefit from canonical definiition of mapping 09:54:19 q+ 09:54:35 ack chr 09:54:53 Felix: so my comment is whether this would be of use to implementors, since in the room there was a lot of familiarisation with the use and benefits of canonicalisation 09:55:19 christian: asks do we have more than one implementation 09:55:32 felix: confirms we have one from sebastian and one from felix 09:56:41 christian: I brought this up to ensure that whenever NIF processing is ensured, we end up with the same representation, and this needs normalisation and canonicalisation 09:57:21 ... if not, then we may end up with versions that are incompatible 09:58:29 felix: asks whether some comparison between document in NIF is an likely use case. would the comparison not takeplace back in the document itself 09:59:25 chrsitian: I think you would need a unicode normalisation 09:59:41 felix: but this was related to regex in another data category 09:59:58 s/chrsitian/christian/ 10:00:16 christian: if we are reocmmending normalisation anyway in this other data category, could we not use this to solve the problem here 10:00:34 topic: issue-74 10:01:05 q+ 10:01:39 scribe: fsasaki 10:01:48 daveL: christian provided some bullet point comments 10:01:55 .. are you planning more re-writing 10:02:04 .. or should david and I take your comments in? 10:02:06 ack cl 10:02:10 ack ch 10:02:17 christian: if it would be ok with you 10:02:27 .. I could turn the bullet points that people could read 10:02:38 .. with respect with the general approach 10:02:44 .. I could do editing of the doc 10:03:07 .. by mid next week 10:03:08 https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/actions/377 10:04:05 that would be action-377 10:04:15 davidF: that's clarificatory stutt, not very urgent 10:04:27 .. will wait for christian for a more readable version 10:05:06 felix: so we have discusesed all comments from christian 10:05:50 felix wil put thoughts on NIF in a mail 10:44:38 daveL has joined #mlw-lt 10:45:41 scribe: Yves_ 10:45:45 Scribe: Yves_ 10:45:56 topic: issue-72 10:46:28 original comment here https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0013.html 10:46:38 .. see "Section 8.12 (Provenance Data Category)" 10:46:47 daveL: Provenance issue is about timestamp 10:47:17 .. quite complex to implement 10:47:44 .. e.g when the information is capture, etc. 10:48:10 .. This is covered by the PROV standard 10:48:22 .. and we have a mechanism to point to that 10:48:35 .. so no need in ITS 10:49:03 yves: so has the order of provenance a meaning? 10:49:18 .. so order SHOULD reflect the order things were order in the document 10:49:40 s/were order/were added/ 10:50:53 swalter has joined #mlw-lt 10:50:55 original commentor got a reply and we are waiting for a response. comment was rejected. 10:51:26 topic: issue-76 10:52:17 Arle: need to re-look at it 10:53:39 Jirka: proposal for a solution is in the issue's note. 10:53:58 .. question was about HTML and rules precedence 10:54:00 topic: issue-77 10:54:24 .. no need to change anything 10:54:37 .. link is the same as link in global rules 10:55:00 resolution proposal - see note from jirka Kosek, 22 Jan 2013, 22:58:35 at https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/77 10:56:07 Marcis: my comment was that it was difficult to understand how things work 10:56:24 .. because it's defined in multiple places 10:57:22 present+ DaveLewis 10:57:27 felix: in section 6.4 there are some explanation 10:57:37 .. we would add Jirka's clarification there 10:58:20 .. this would define the inheritance behavior 10:59:05 jirka: maybe issue is that global rules need to be read in document order 10:59:15 "Global selections in documents (using mechanism of external global rules or inline global rules)" > "Global selections in documents (using mechanism of external global rules or inline global rules), to be processed in document order" 11:00:53 "Global selections in documents (using mechanism of external global rules or inline global rules)" > "Global selections in documents (using mechanism of external global rules or inline global rules), to be processed in document order, see section 5.2.1 for details " 11:01:03 Felix: could point to 5.2.1 in the HTML section 11:02:18 rrsagent, draft minutes 11:02:18 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html Yves_ 11:03:01 felix: let's close this issue. See the note in the issue page. 11:03:23 action: jirka to make edit for issue-77 11:03:23 Created ACTION-391 - Make edit for issue-77 [on Jirka Kosek - due 2013-01-30]. 11:03:41 topic: issue-76 agan 11:03:45 s/agan/again/ 11:04:08 Arle: an implementer was looking at issue's type 11:04:21 .. and saw inconsistency 11:04:27 original comment at https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0026.html 11:04:49 .. solution would be to change the definition 11:05:19 .. add "or text is translated inconsistently" 11:05:29 .. and a second example. 11:05:46 Proposed change: The text is inconsistent within itself or text is translated inconsistently (NB: not for use with terminology inconsistency). 11:05:57 Add second example: The translated text uses different wording for a single regulatory notice in the source that occurs multiple times in a series of manuals. 11:06:18 change in this sec https://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-its20-20121206/#lqissue-typevalues 11:08:06 action: arle to make the edit for issue 76 11:08:06 Created ACTION-392 - Make the edit for issue 76 [on Arle Lommel - due 2013-01-30]. 11:08:20 topic: issue-78 11:08:58 Felix: MIME type was registered, no more action is needed. 11:09:10 topic: issue-79 11:09:36 s/MIME Type/rel-type/ 11:10:10 Felix: wrote a reply to that comment 11:10:19 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0145.html 11:11:42 .. added text indicating namespace prefix can be difference than its if it exists already 11:12:02 Jirka: this just duplicate information. not good 11:12:43 .. the initial text should already address the comment 11:13:09 "The namespace URI that MUST be used by implementations of this specification is:" > "The namespace URI that MUST be used by XML-based implementations of this specification is:" 11:13:19 .. add only "XML-based" to implementation 11:13:53 action: felix to go back to richard about new resolution for issue-79 11:13:54 Created ACTION-393 - Go back to richard about new resolution for issue-79 [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30]. 11:15:03 Topic: issue-80 11:15:34 Felix: we can just add links to example 11:15:50 action: felix to add links to examples for issue 80 11:15:50 Created ACTION-394 - Add links to examples for issue 80 [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30]. 11:16:03 topic: issue-81 11:16:25 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0071.html 11:16:35 felix: related to issue-89 11:16:38 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0066.html 11:17:24 Felix: issue is not clear how HTML maps to ITS 11:17:43 .. some HTML construct are explicitely mapped, other are not 11:17:56 .. like terminology (dfn, dt, etc.) 11:18:41 .. should an implementer of HTML/ITS process those constructs as term? or not? 11:18:49 https://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-xml-i18n-bp-20080213/ 11:19:00 https://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-xml-i18n-bp-20080213/#relating-its-plus-xhtml 11:19:01 ..Possible solution is a mapping defined in bets practice 11:19:14 .. like we did in ITS 1.0 11:19:45 .. we did this only as a best practice 11:19:59 .. e.g. we don't talk about dfn in ITS 1.0 11:20:33 .. for issue 81 we would not define normative relation to term 11:20:53 .. but provide mapping in best practices document 11:21:16 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0111.html 11:21:27 .. related issue is issue-97 11:22:15 .. some HTML features are used but not declared as such, like 'translate' 11:23:50 .. we should have something like "the ITS processor implementing Tranlsate MUST implement HTML5 translate attribute" 11:24:26 See also note in issue-97 11:26:13 Yves: this would resolve the issue 11:26:34 "the ITS processor implementing Tranlsate MUST implement HTML5 translate attribute" > "the ITS processor implementing Translate MUST implement HTML5 translate attribute in the same was as the ITS translate attribute for XML content" 11:28:16 dF: we have a problem 11:29:08 .. we don't have an its-translate equivalent 11:29:21 Yves: we map to a functionality not an attribute 11:29:30 .. like id or lang 11:30:10 dF: we want to say HTML5 translate is the Translate local markup 11:30:28 Yves: maybe we can re-use same text as for lang and id 11:31:41 "The recommended way to specify language identification is to use xml:lang in XML, and lang in HTML." 11:33:23 Felix: for language we would need to say that lang has precedence 11:36:02 "If the attribute xml:id is present or id in HTML for the selected node, the value of the xml:id attribute or id in HTML MUST take precedence over the idValue value." 11:36:22 for lang info to be adapted to mention precedence of xml:lang and lang other langRule 11:37:06 Felix: we don't have an issue for lang 11:37:21 .. we would also need test cases 11:38:25 Felix: if there are xml;lang and lang present, lang MUST take precedence 11:38:36 .. we need a test case for it 11:39:54 Felix: need to test xml:lang lang in a XHTML file 11:41:39 https://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#C_7 11:42:10 action: felix to check what of lang and xml;lang takes precedence 11:42:10 Created ACTION-395 - Check what of lang and xml;lang takes precedence [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30]. 11:42:30 action: ankit to create example for xml;lang / lang 11:42:30 Created ACTION-396 - Create example for xml;lang / lang [on Ankit Srivastava - due 2013-01-30]. 11:43:02 Yves: xml;lang seems to take precedence according: https://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#C_7 11:43:10 In HTML 5 the native HTML 5 translate attribute must be used to express the Translate data category. 11:43:17 issue-97 proposal 11:43:29 s/must/MUST/ 11:44:16 action: yves to enter the new text for 97 (above) 11:44:16 Created ACTION-397 - Enter the new text for 97 (above) [on Yves Savourel - due 2013-01-30]. 11:45:29 dF: I would table the dfn/dt issue before Term/Disambiguation is resolved 11:46:07 Felix: think there are 2 type of content: clear relation (like id translate) and un-clear (dfn) 11:46:29 macris: dfn is very narrow 11:46:42 .. employed only in very restricted definition 11:47:01 s/macris/Marcis/ 11:47:13 .. dfn is like a sub-type of ITS term 11:47:28 Tadej: dt is only in a list 11:48:40 karlF: adding a default rule would be better 11:48:46 .. simpler 11:49:02 Marcis: but only in a BP document 11:49:06 Felix: yes 11:49:58 https://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-xml-i18n-bp-20080213/#relating-its-plus-xhtml 11:51:22 action: Felix to answer Richard to indicate we'll address this with a rule file in BP 11:51:22 Created ACTION-398 - Answer Richard to indicate we'll address this with a rule file in BP [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30]. 11:51:54 action: Felix to draft non-normative section clarifying relations to HTML for issue 89 11:51:54 Created ACTION-399 - Draft non-normative section clarifying relations to HTML for issue 89 [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30]. 11:55:01 action felix to edit the specification for Translate (MUST missing, etc.) 11:55:02 Created ACTION-400 - Edit the specification for Translate (MUST missing, etc.) [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30]. 11:55:31 s/Translate/Language/ 11:55:47 topic: issue-82 11:56:51 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0067.html 11:57:59 Felix: if values are ok, no need to have a mapping 11:58:03 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-international/2013JanMar/0048.html 11:59:27 felix: something without mapping just pass through 12:01:04 answer to the comment: "STEP 3-1-2-5-2. Else (if no mapping is found): Add the string (in its original cases) to the result string." 12:01:19 action daveL: reply to Richard 12:01:20 Created ACTION-401 - Reply to Richard [on David Lewis - due 2013-01-30]. 12:02:16 topic: case related comments 12:02:27 https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/102 12:03:17 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0116.html 12:03:23 Pablo: at first we used case-sensitive 12:03:37 .. then we moved to insensitive 12:04:17 .. we could compare directly 12:04:50 .. but if document is encoded differently we may have entities 12:04:58 .. and the string is different 12:05:10 scribe: fsasaki 12:05:17 yves: by entity you mean "person"? 12:05:21 pablo: yes 12:05:22 12:05:30 ... domainMapping="Economía (ECON), Leyes (Law)"/> 12:05:31 yves: but that gets resolved then you parse the documnt 12:05:37 pablo: see example above 12:06:02 yves: then you read the document the entity wil be converted into í 12:06:13 .. if we just do case-sensitive we have a problem 12:06:25 .. the reason why we want to have insensitive: to avoid duplicates 12:06:45 .. because we know people don't regard casing for keywords anyway 12:07:03 .. so in one case we say: case matters, in others we say they don't matter 12:07:19 .. so one solution is: case always matters 12:07:27 .. but what is the solution for HTML? 12:07:50 davidF: wouldn't be worried that you preserve case 12:07:58 .. only if you fail to map 12:08:12 yves: only when you compare during the mapping you are uncertain 12:08:24 .. problem is: many documents have keywords typed differently 12:09:04 .. could also have a keyword saying "mapping or not" 12:09:34 felix: would that delay the problem 12:09:35 ... 12:10:58 resolution: agree with first question in https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0116.html 12:11:09 .. 2nd question becomes unnecessary 12:11:50 scribe: Yves_ 12:12:03 action yves to fix text and algo for domain case mapping 12:12:03 Created ACTION-402 - Fix text and algo for domain case mapping [on Yves Savourel - due 2013-01-30]. 12:12:17 scribe Yves_ 12:13:59 dF: dave split the issue into 3 topics 12:14:09 .. first one was 84 12:14:28 reply from dave on issue-84 at https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0149.html 12:14:48 .. answer is: yes transliterating is different but we didn't have enough use cases for a requirement 12:15:06 .. that made it as a final data category 12:16:08 Zakim has left #mlw-lt 12:16:21 rrsagent, draft minutes 12:16:21 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html Yves_ 12:16:51 felix: so we are waiting for a reply now 12:17:46 topic: ISSUE-86 12:18:00 felix: implementation committement 12:18:11 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0144.html 12:18:25 for several issues 12:18:52 .. for Ruby and Directionality 12:19:17 .. basically we don't have experts and no volunteer to implement 12:19:34 .. Ruby may be ported for XLIFF 12:20:52 .. still not sure what is the aim: dropping ruby or not? 12:21:08 .. also not sure when we can expect stability 12:21:20 .. but we want to be feature complete very soon 12:21:49 .. questions to the i18n are out, waiting for feedback 12:22:17 yves: directionality is not really used in XLIFF 12:22:22 .. implementers use control characters 12:22:38 .. we tried really hard in XLIFF2 12:22:49 .. we have a module for directionality in XLIFF2 12:23:12 .. but the implementers would insert rather control characters than markup 12:24:55 Pedro has joined #mlw-lt 12:25:19 dF: when we discussed directionality in Lyon, someone described how to do dir with inline markup 12:25:51 present+ Pedro 12:27:11 felix: .. for Ruby, I don't think anyone implemented the pointer for example 12:27:26 Arle: need to speak to Asian developers 12:27:37 .. group is not representative 12:27:48 .. for these issues 12:28:50 Felix: for Japanese there is a detailed document on layout 12:29:07 .. and requirements in XML and HTML are pushed by this document 12:29:31 .. Our question is how can we deal with it? 12:30:12 Arle: maybe it can be defined later in a different namespace 12:30:29 Felix: maybe, but baiscally it's the same for ITS 2. 12:30:39 felix: lunh time now 12:30:52 s/lunh/lunch 12:30:56 rrsagent, draft minutes 12:30:56 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html Yves_ 12:31:00 s/lunh/lunch/ 13:28:23 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html fsasaki 13:29:14 Arle has joined #mlw-lt 13:30:10 Ankit has joined #mlw-lt 13:31:02 daveL has joined #mlw-lt 13:31:09 present+ DaveLewis 13:31:18 present+ Arle 13:31:50 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html fsasaki 13:36:41 Milan has joined #mlw-lt 13:38:37 Scribe: Arle 13:38:48 topic: meeting schedule 13:38:58 https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/EventSchedule 13:38:58 Felix: I thought of discussing the next meetings, but Pedro isn't here. 13:39:30 .. See the wiki page. You will see that thanks to Tadej that we have a face-to-face in Bled in May. 13:40:21 .. I just got an email from Pedro with some offers to host the face-to-face in Madrid, but all are beyond budget (€5000), because he would have to rent meeting space. 13:40:44 .. We might need to think of an alternative to Madrid. One alternative is LocWorld in June in London. 13:40:58 .. We could ask Microsoft if there is a London office we could use. 13:41:16 s/Microsoft/xyz/ 13:41:46 LocWorld is 12–14 June 13:42:18 David: 10 June is XLIFF; 11–12 June (?) is FEISGILTT 13:42:47 Felix: We will need technical discussions in June. 13:43:05 Yves: Whole week is booked for some people with the different events. 13:43:11 Felix: Week of 17th? 13:43:38 .. Please check your calendars to see if that might work. 13:44:25 .. 17–18 June is the suggestion. 13:45:09 Location: TBD in a cheap place. 13:45:22 Felix: Berlin would be free. 13:45:36 s/Location:/.. Location/ 13:45:49 Dave: Dublin is an option. 13:46:20 Action: Felix is to check availability of Berlin on 17–18 June. 13:46:21 Created ACTION-403 - Is to check availability of Berlin on 17–18 June. [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30]. 13:46:34 Jirka has joined #mlw-lt 13:46:54 Action: daveL to check availability in Dublin for face-to-face meeting on 17–18 June. 13:46:54 Created ACTION-404 - Check availability in Dublin for face-to-face meeting on 17–18 June. [on David Lewis - due 2013-01-30]. 13:48:00 Pedro: I am looking at various possibilities in Madrid still. 13:48:01 tadej has joined #mlw-lt 13:48:49 Felix: Would it be OK for you if we look at other cities to save costs? 13:48:59 leroy has joined #mlw-lt 13:49:01 Pedro: That is fine for me. Leave Madrid as an alternative. 13:49:43 .. My latest option in Madrid comes to 3–3.5K€, if we have everyone stay at the same hotel. 13:50:30 Felix: We need to fix these dates as soon as possible because of Localization World so that travel can be arranged by everyone as appropriate. 13:52:21 .. Dave and I will try to decide so people can make arrangements. 13:52:53 https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/EventSchedule 13:53:02 .. We are also considering another face-to-face in September, around LRC conference. 13:53:26 .. In Limerick. 13:54:34 .. Dates would be 16–17 September (pending confirmation). 13:54:44 mdelolmo has joined #mlw-lt 13:56:34 .. Would 23–24 September be also good 13:56:45 will come back to september meeting tomorrow 13:56:50 s/also good/also good?/ 13:57:01 23-24 would be difficult for cocomore 13:57:31 topic: Last workshop 13:58:25 Felix: Project ends in December. DoW shows we spend most efforts until September, so if the workshop is in December, mass may be difficult. Do we have a regular workshop, or some other kind of event? 13:58:39 .. Any ideas of other options for final event? 13:58:58 .. We can't drop it due to work package, which describes it as biggest workshop. 13:59:42 Pedro: What about colocation of the final workshop with another event? 14:00:04 .. David: What about tcworld? 14:00:22 s/.. David:/David../ 14:00:33 .. It is a big one. Might be good to connect there. 14:01:17 Action: Felix to follow up with Christian on tekom as an option. 14:01:17 Created ACTION-405 - Follow up with Christian on tekom as an option. [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30]. 14:01:37 Arle: Consider that colocating with a commercial event will likely have higher costs. 14:01:53 Felix: We can do another MLW workshop, or look at other options. 14:01:58 Yves: That is a lot of work. 14:02:09 Felix: Yes, and after September, we can't ask people for a lot of work. 14:02:26 .. Also, September/October is probably too early for the next workshop after the one in March. 14:03:20 .. What if we don't make a conference or go to one? Instead we have an event (possibly closed) to do demos to customers? 14:03:52 Pedro: Tekom, Wiesbaden 06Nov-08Nov2013 14:04:28 Felix: we can consider still in January. Let me and Dave know of any options that come to mind. 14:05:01 Dave: I can already confirm space would be available in Dublin in June. 14:06:06 topic: posters 14:06:47 Felix: Our reviewers will most likely not be in Rome. So we need to make a presentation in Luxembourg. Posters would help show completion. 14:07:26 Pedro: What size should they be? 14:07:30 Felix: A0. 14:07:43 Action: Arle to resize templates for posters from A1 to A0. 14:07:43 Created ACTION-406 - Resize templates for posters from A1 to A0. [on Arle Lommel - due 2013-01-30]. 14:08:11 topic: Issues 14:08:34 scribe daveL 14:10:11 topic: issue-88 14:10:12 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0070.html 14:10:32 felix: this is just editorial in the directionality section 14:11:00 Scribe: Arle 14:11:09 s/topic: Issues// 14:11:13 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html fsasaki 14:11:42 David: I don't know the difference between the HTML elements here. 14:12:18 Action: Felix to check for clarification on Issue-88 14:12:18 Created ACTION-407 - Check for clarification on Issue-88 [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30]. 14:13:27 topic: issue-92 14:13:51 original mail at https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0076.html 14:14:01 Yves: This is a note from Richard asking why information is in a note, which is not normative. 14:14:26 .. Can a note be normative? I believe they can be if they are in a normative section. I believe we have MUSTS in notes. 14:14:36 Felix: I think that is a mistake. 14:14:46 Action: Felix to ensure that there is no MUST in any notes. 14:14:46 Created ACTION-408 - Ensure that there is no MUST in any notes. [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30]. 14:15:01 Yves: idValue global has one. 14:16:40 relation to issue-103 - clarify the algorithm 14:17:20 .. One explanation + bullet explaining that empty = no locale and * = all locales. Then we can eliminate the note. 14:17:49 Felix: Solution is to have three bullets explaining the cases, and delete note. Resolves issue-92 and issue-103. 14:18:17 .. Yves, do you use extended filtering? 14:18:46 Yves: Yes. We do. We need to check with Shaun, but I believe this is the algorithm for extended filtering. 14:20:06 Felix: We need to express the approach described in BCP47 and that it will work for everyone implementing this. Tilde should check. 14:21:02 .. Ankit and Marcis, should we return to this, or can we assume that if we don't hear otherwise, it’s OK? 14:22:00 Action: Yves to follow up with Richard and Norbert on action-92 and action-103. 14:22:00 Created ACTION-409 - Follow up with Richard and Norbert on action-92 and action-103. [on Yves Savourel - due 2013-01-30]. 14:22:14 s/action-92/issue-92/ 14:22:36 s/action-103/issue-103/ 14:22:54 Marcis has joined #mlw-lt 14:23:14 topic: Issue-93 14:23:52 Jirka: Proposed resolution is to use what was proposed by original commenter. 14:24:22 Action: Jirka to write to Henry on issue-93 and make the change in the text. 14:24:23 Created ACTION-410 - Write to Henry on issue-93 and make the change in the text. [on Jirka Kosek - due 2013-01-30]. 14:25:05 topic: Issue-94 14:25:18 Felix: I think Jirka has a proposed resolution. 14:25:44 Jirka: I've sent replies to Henry, but not heard back. I think we should resolve this issue in a different way. See link at end of issue. 14:26:27 .. HTML has different rules for processing white space and decimal numbers. There is different precision between XML and HTML. 14:28:05 .. The easiest resolution is to use the double data type in XML for ITS. It will align XLM and HTML. Double is implemented in almost all programming languages. So we move all data types to double and deal with the differences in leading and trailing whitespace between the two. 14:28:28 Felix: This impacts localization quality, MT confidence, and localization quality rating. 14:28:41 .. Is this OK for all implementers? 14:29:19 Jirka: Only difference is that double has lower precision than decimal. And you can use exponential notation. 14:29:38 Felix: Also disambigConfidence and term confidence. 14:30:38 Action: Jirka to change localization quality, localization rating, mt confidence, term confidence, and disambig confidence to use double rather than decimal and respond to Henry (Issue-94) 14:30:38 Created ACTION-411 - Change localization quality, localization rating, mt confidence, term confidence, and disambig confidence to use double rather than decimal and respond to Henry (Issue-94) [on Jirka Kosek - due 2013-01-30]. 14:31:35 topic: issue-95 14:31:45 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0093.html 14:33:14 Felix: We should reject this. The proposal itself said that translatable is different than localizable (e.g., in formatting numbers and images). 14:33:37 .. Discussion was between Norbert, Felix, Des, and Phil. 14:34:00 .. I think addressing this would take too much time at this point. 14:34:17 another point for Dave here https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0147.html 14:34:28 Dave: It really is out of scope for ITS. 14:34:40 .. Translators will deal with this on their own anyway. 14:35:29 Felix: Norbert asked if we could use ITS for localizing CLDR? I don't see that as a real use case. 14:35:43 Action: Felix to let Norbert know that action-95 is out of scope. 14:35:43 Created ACTION-412 - Let Norbert know that action-95 is out of scope. [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30]. 14:36:16 topic: issue-96 14:36:24 s/action-95/issue-95/ 14:36:54 topic: issue-98 14:36:57 topic: issue-98 14:37:14 s/issue-98/issue-98 and issue-99 14:38:07 truedesheim has joined #mlw-lt 14:38:17 Milan: related to issue-99. I found that there is no way to do this. It is mentioned only for global approach to selectors and what is allowed. Chapter 1.1 should state that the local approach can be applied only to the content of the current element and any inherited nodes, per 8.1 14:40:29 .. For issue-99, when using selectors in ITS, how do you select attributes? Information is there, but the definition of node differs between XML and HTML, leading to confusion. I see Yves’ suggestion to remove CSS as a selector type since they can point only to elements, but I would keep it and add a note that we can only point to elements, not attributes. 14:40:41 David: I think it makes sense to keep CSS. 14:41:40 Felix: We don't have any implementers using selectors. 14:41:48 Yves: Shaun is, as a prototype. 14:41:54 Felix: I never got it to work. 14:42:07 Yves: Norbert says for HTML people selectors may be important. 14:42:22 .. But with no implementations, it won't happen. It's marked as endangered. 14:42:46 Felix: We can drop "at risk" bits. 14:42:59 .. I agree with Milan's solution, but we might drop them anyway. 14:43:37 Jirka: suggested a path to get implementation. 14:43:59 Felix: It would be nice. Right now we have two paths, doing testing only for XPath, but not for CSS. 14:44:09 Jirka: Do we need tests, since they just select nodes? 14:44:30 Felix: Maybe the test suite or elsewhere, would we have examples making use of CSS. 14:44:56 .. If we don't have testing, W3C management may not like us saying "you can do it on your own but we haven't done it." 14:45:36 Jirka: We need at least one selection mechanism. Testing is to verify interoperability. 14:46:12 Felix: We need to have at least one example for standardization and users about how to use it. We have no CSS examples. 14:46:22 Jirka: Let's have some examples, parallel to XPath examples. 14:46:45 Felix: Can you link to libraries to convert between CSS and XPath selectors? 14:47:05 .. Are there non-browser conversions? 14:47:51 Action: Jirka to find data on CSS and XPath selectors conversion libraries and keep CSS selectors in the spec. 14:47:51 Created ACTION-413 - Find data on CSS and XPath selectors conversion libraries and keep CSS selectors in the spec. [on Jirka Kosek - due 2013-01-30]. 14:48:31 topic: issue-100 14:48:38 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0126.html 14:48:54 Felix: Yves proposed a resolution. 14:49:07 Action: Felix to make edit for issue-100 and get back to Norbert. 14:49:07 Created ACTION-414 - Make edit for issue-100 and get back to Norbert. [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30]. 14:49:35 topic: issue-104 14:49:59 Action: Felix to update unicode reference for issue-104 14:49:59 Created ACTION-415 - Update unicode reference for issue-104 [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30]. 14:50:18 topic: issue-106 and issue-107 14:50:58 106 see https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0121.html 14:51:21 s/106/107/ 14:51:27 Karl: Norbert asked some questions and we weren't sure how to resolve them. It isn't up to the spec. The implementation must support UTF-8, but that is up to the implementer. It is best practice, especially for storage size. But we don't think it has to be mandatory for all implementations. 14:51:29 106 see https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0120.html 14:52:18 .. Other question was how to handle encoding when the implementation doesn't support it. Again, this is not up to the spec. We can define best practice, but it doesn't need to be stated in the spec. 14:53:30 Stephan: Perhaps we have an explanation about what storage size is used for. The question is about when it is used to markup text in the source language. It is informational, but not up to the spec to tell us what to do if a tool doesn't support an encoding or if user text cannot be represented in a given encoding. 14:54:00 Karl: We should add a sentence to storage size, per the note on the issue-107. 14:54:28 Felix: on issue-106 and issue-107 we do nothing, just let Norbert know the rationale. 14:56:17 Action: Karl to propose solution to Norbert and then Felix can add to spec. 14:56:17 Created ACTION-416 - Propose solution to Norbert and then Felix can add to spec. [on Karl Fritsche - due 2013-01-30]. 14:56:48 Felix: When we go back to Norbert, talk about what we did in the group to show there is consensus. 14:57:23 topic: issue-108 and issue-109 14:57:40 Felix: Both relate to Indic requirements. 14:58:35 Dave: They make a point that there is dependency on context (e.g., part of speech) that influences how you translate things. They want PoS in localizationNote and provided an annex of possible annotations. 14:59:53 .. Adding a data type specifically for this would be a big change. You see companies when they want to add their own metadata use localizationNote with name:value pairs. It could be best practice outside the spec. 15:00:27 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt-comments/2013Jan/0154.html 15:00:33 reply from Dave on locNote its2 req , see above mail 15:01:12 Dave: I pointed them to other relevant resources, like NIF. 15:02:32 Arle: This would be too complex for us to solve this problem. Anything that works for Europe may fall apart elsewhere. 15:02:54 .. I don't think we could solve this in a reasonable time frame without too much controversy. 15:03:45 Tadej: they have PoS taggers in MT already, but it is specialized. This would be scope creep. 15:04:01 Marcis: Once you add PoS, you have to add syntax, etc.… 15:04:22 Dave: Do humans need PoS tagging? I don't know. 15:04:29 tadej has joined #mlw-lt 15:04:42 Marcis: Wouldn't this be duplicating existing work in text analysis. 15:05:35 Action: DaveL to go back to Somnath on issue-108 to explain why we won't address it. 15:05:35 Created ACTION-417 - Go back to Somnath on issue-108 to explain why we won't address it. [on David Lewis - due 2013-01-30]. 15:05:56 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html fsasaki 15:06:05 Dave: issue-109 falls out of my expertise. It deals with nested output from NER. 15:06:57 Tadej: I didn't quite follow the requirements. It seems they want to show that parts of entities may be entities. I don't know if they need this or are showing what they might do with this. 15:07:35 .. Regardless of this, the comment that hierarchy is needed. 15:07:40 Dave: We can't do this. 15:08:08 Tadej: Overriding makes that the case, but if we allowed multiple values, we could. 15:08:19 Dave: But you need to show that the different parts are bound together. 15:09:56 Tadej: If you allow multiple values (e.g., something can belong to two entities), then the scope can be ambiguous. 15:10:26 Marcis: But there should be no ambiguous overlaps in a hierarchy. 15:10:56 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html fsasaki 15:11:59 Stephan: When would you actually use the knowledge that you have nested named entities? 15:12:18 Tadej: Can we make the restriction that entities are contiguous? 15:12:23 Dave: That would be reasonable. 15:13:03 Dave: The solution isn't straight-foward. This would be a new feature. I think we should respond in that way. 15:13:20 s/Dave: The solution/.. The solution/ 15:15:00 Discussion about whether hierarchy is needed and produced. 15:15:12 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html fsasaki 15:15:15 Dave: You could also point to a NIF record with that structure in it. 15:15:42 Tadej: If several disambiguationRefs address something, we can't tell which one produced what. 15:16:03 .. If a single node can have multiple values it makes tracking hard. We use stand-off for this. 15:16:20 .. This multiple granularity might break things. 15:16:57 Action: Dave to respond to Somnath on issue-109 to explain we are looking at it to make recommendations. 15:16:57 Error finding 'Dave'. You can review and register nicknames at . 15:17:02 Action: DaveL to respond to Somnath on issue-109 to explain we are looking at it to make recommendations. 15:17:02 Created ACTION-418 - Respond to Somnath on issue-109 to explain we are looking at it to make recommendations. [on David Lewis - due 2013-01-30]. 15:18:09 topic: locale filtering question 15:18:18 marcis: in content is "de" 15:18:30 .. in the localeFilter it would be de-de 15:19:21 felix: not matched 15:35:29 mdelolmo has joined #mlw-lt 15:42:29 tadej has joined #mlw-lt 15:46:39 topic: test suite check 15:47:18 Felix: We don't have a lot of coverage (38%) and most of that is thanks to Yves and Fredryk (ENLASO). 15:47:52 .. At the end of January we have the deadline to run all test cases. Is that deadline (next week) realistic? We have some changes, but others are stable. 15:48:19 Milan has joined #mlw-lt 15:48:47 Leroy: The files will remain the same, with changes after the 21st. 15:49:23 Karl: our cases are theoretically all working, but we have some issues with sorting of attributes, which we don't do. That's the only reason we aren't complete. 15:49:58 .. In the input attributes are source and alt. We output them in that order, but the output sorts them. 15:50:15 Leroy: I can run my sorting function on output for you. 15:50:38 Stephan: Actually, it is backward, the source is in order, the output isn't. 15:50:56 Yves: Many engines do not care about order. You have to handle sorting yourselves. 15:51:29 Karl: It's not a big change and then we are done. I will make the change myself. 15:51:47 Ankit: We have a few small snags. 15:53:52 Linguaserve: (Some issues. ???) 15:54:06 Thomas: We are working on our implementations, should be ready next week. 15:54:47 David: Connection between Moravia and UL tests… 15:57:42 Felix: David, I know you use Okapi wrapper. When that is integrated in the workflow, you can run the same tests as Okapi. So now you run six cases, but you could run more then. 15:58:36 topic: RFC statements 15:59:00 https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Ownership_of_rfc2119_statements 15:59:25 Felix: Much is covered by the schema. 16:00:41 ..#25 talks about the content of the annotatorsRef attribute. Currently the data type is text. There is a need for test case with a file with a non-allowed identifier and the parser says it is wrong. That would test it, even though it does not produce specified output. 16:01:14 ..David, could you make a test case and get the implementers to run it? 16:01:21 ..See example below: 16:01:29 annotatorsRef="mt-confidence|tool1" 16:01:32 annotatorsRef="mtconfidence|tool1" 16:01:43 ..Second line should throw an error. 16:01:59 Yves: Do we have standard output for the errors? 16:02:15 Felix: No. This will require human verification. 16:05:12 .. We can address issues here until October. 16:05:27 .. After XML Prague would be fine. 16:05:38 Jirka: We can do this using Schematron with regex. 16:05:58 Karl: There are similar cases in the docs to do negative tests. 16:06:38 Jirka: It's already there, but you have to look at the Schematron, not the XSD. 16:09:41 .. Doing as much as possible in Schematron. 16:09:55 Felix: What about #39, #35, #41? 16:11:50 .. If not checked by Schematron, please add later. 16:12:39 action: jirka to make schematron tests described at https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Ownership_of_rfc2119_statements#Purpose 16:12:39 Created ACTION-419 - Make schematron tests described at https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Ownership_of_rfc2119_statements#Purpose [on Jirka Kosek - due 2013-01-30]. 16:13:40 Felix: #31, if values have spaces, must be delimited with quotation marks. Need a test case? 16:13:58 Yves: It's already covered by the test cases, which fail if the output isn't formatted properly. 16:15:27 Felix: #36. Overriding means these won't be combined anyway. Maybe make an action to delete the sentence in 8.11.2? 16:16:50 Action-420 16:17:00 trackbot has joined #mlw-lt 16:17:52 Refers Issue-111 16:18:04 action: felix to make edit for issue-111 16:18:04 Created ACTION-420 - Make edit for issue-111 [on Felix Sasaki - due 2013-01-30]. 16:18:45 Felix: #36 is dropped. 16:20:39 " If the type of the issue is set to uncategorized, a comment MUST be specified as well." - can be checked, an error if no comment is avaiable 16:26:43 Felix: Maybe we put the other MUST statement (about mapping internal types to issue type values) as its own test type. To catch the error, you must be able to parse the category. 16:27:09 .. You need to understand the values and different types or markup. It is on top of the normal test suite functionality. 16:29:58 Arle_ has joined #mlw-lt 16:32:10 Yves: We don't need the MUST there. The value column covers the same thing. 16:40:02 Discussion about where to test. 16:41:24 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html fsasaki 16:41:38 topic: test suite 16:41:40 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html fsasaki 16:41:56 s/topic: test suite// 16:41:59 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html fsasaki 16:45:32 "The set of characters that are allowed is specified using a regular expression. That is, each character in the selected content MUST be included in the set specified by the regular expression." 16:49:19 this is not a test for the processor, but for the consuming application 16:51:25 for IANA charset names see https://www.iana.org/assignments/character-sets/character-sets.xml 16:53:16 we point to the IANA list, that's it 16:53:34 relevant for this MUST statement: "A storageEncoding attribute. It contains the name of the character set encoding used to calculate the number of bytes of the selected text. The name MUST be one of the names or aliases listed in the IANA Character Sets registry . The default value is UTF-8." 16:56:47 Felix: For many quality issue type items, change MUST/MUST NOT to must/must not. 16:57:06 .. Numbers 45–48 16:57:46 "See entries 45-48 at https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Ownership_of_rfc2119_statements#Purpose these statements are not verifable. Proposal is to set MUST and MUST NOT to lower case to make clear that the text is just guidance." 17:00:12 for 45 " The values a tool implementing the data category produces for the attribute MUST match one of the values provided in this table and MUST be semantically accurate.": re-formulate this : 17:02:28 drop "MUST be semantically accurate". 17:03:43 "If a tool can map its internal values to these types it MUST do so and MUST NOT use the value other, which is reserved strictly for values that cannot be mapped to these values." -> "Note that the other category is reserved for cases where a tool-specific category cannot be mapped…" 17:05:41 action: arle to work on statements 45-48 at https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Ownership_of_rfc2119_statements#Purpose , see prague f2f minutes 17:05:41 Created ACTION-421 - Work on statements 45-48 at https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Ownership_of_rfc2119_statements#Purpose , see prague f2f minutes [on Arle Lommel - due 2013-01-30]. 17:06:11 Yves pointed out that the values should be done by class, not on an individual error basis independent of classes. 17:07:00 #48. If a system has an "miscellaneous" or "other" category, it MUST be mapped to this value even if the specific instance of the issue might be mapped to another category -> append note on semantic accuracy here. 17:08:43 topic: requirements doc 17:08:54 s/doc/doc and issues not addressed in ITS2 17:10:29 multi-engine domain scenario + multi engine domain scenario 17:11:19 issue-95 and issue-75 would be covered by this 17:12:03 https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#autoLanguageProcessingRule 17:12:24 https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#Process 17:12:39 https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#formatType 17:12:45 https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#genre 17:12:52 https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#purpose 17:13:01 https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#translatorQualification 17:13:07 https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#register 17:13:18 https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#contentLicensingTerms 17:13:50 https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#author 17:14:06 (covered by dc.terms 17:14:28 https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#confidentiality 17:14:35 https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#context 17:14:50 https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/wiki/Requirements#languageResource 17:19:57 for 45: Note that the other category is reserved... -> Note that the "other" category is reserved to cases where a tool-specific category cannot be mapped to any of the first categories in a semantically accurate manner. 17:21:41 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2013/01/23-mlw-lt-minutes.html fsasaki