[Latingp] Minutes from the call on May 30, 2017

Tue Jun 6 15:49:29 UTC 2017

Thanks Hazzem, repertoire building section of the Proceduresat mentions a
number of code points that are used in multiple scripts. Do you want to
give examples?
Also, some code points apparently have ambiguous status. What does it mean
for a code point to have such a status? and how do you resolve it?

On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 4:12 PM, Hazem Hezzah <hhezzah.las at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
>
>
> After going through this thread of messages, let me suggest the following
> approach as a start, with possibility to refine  as we go on.
>
> 1.      Decide which languages we will include in the first phase of
> repertoire building. According to EGIDS scale either 1-2 (93 languages),
> 1-3 (134 languages), or 1-4 (180 languages). I would suggest to finish 1-2
> then go on to 3- 4.         The 3 Latin EGIDS 0 languages (English,
> French, Spanish) are included in the 1 list
>
> 2.      Taking the MSR-2 tables as our starting pool, I see that there
> are already a number of code points ineligible from being used in the root
> zone (white and pink background), so our pool will be only characters with
> white background. (*recitation needed if pink background characters are
> to be included*)
>
> 3.      Distributing the languages on members for analysis, I would
> suggest that each one goes through the characters of the language in hand,
> then makes a mark on each code point found in the MSR.
>
> 4.      If any character is not found in the MSR, take a note to look
> after it later.
>
> 5.      For every other language analyzing, if code point found already
> has a mark, go on to next character.
>
> 6.      At the end by combining all marks of all languages inspected, I
> think we can consider that the repertoire consists of all marked code
> points.
>
> 7.      Missing code points taken notes with should be decided what to do
> towards.
>
>
>
> Any suggestions for handling combinations?
>
>
>
> Welcoming your opinions.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> *Hazem Hezzah*
>
>
>
> *From:* latingp-bounces at icann.org [mailto:latingp-bounces at icann.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Bill Jouris
> *Sent:* Monday, 05 June, 2017 18:19
> *To:* Mats Dufberg
> *Cc:* Latin GP
>
> *Subject:* Re: [Latingp] Minutes from the call on May 30, 2017
>
>
>
> Pardon my ignorance -- being with the Variant group, I didn't realize that
> you folks in Repetoire were considering any other approach.
>
>
>
> Starting with the most used languages, and then working thru as many of
> the less used ones as time allows, seems like the obvious approach.  Were
> you guys actually considering a different one?
>
>
>
> Bill Jouris
> Inside Products
> bill.jouris at insidethestack.com
> 831-659-8360 <(831)%20659-8360>
> 925-855-9512 <(925)%20855-9512> (direct)
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Mats Dufberg <mats.dufberg at iis.se>
> *To:* Bill Jouris <bill.jouris at insidethestack.com>
> *Cc:* Latin GP <latingp at icann.org>; "ahmedbakhat at yahoo.com" <
> ahmedbakhat at yahoo.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, June 5, 2017 9:11 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [Latingp] Minutes from the call on May 30, 2017
>
>
>
> Bill,
>
>
>
> Inclusion of languages or code points?
>
>
>
> The only code points that we can include are the code points that we have
> confirmed to be used by languages according to the criteria, i.e. the
> language must be high enough on the EGIDS scale (low number) and the usage
> in some language should be contemporary and established. All other code
> points are excluded.
>
>
>
> The number of languages is high. That is a fact. The only way to reduce
> the number of languages is to move the border higher up in scale.
>
>
>
> My suggestion is that we should start working by taking the languages
> highest up on the scale (0-2) and get some experience from that. When we
> see what we get, we can move into languages 3-4.
>
>
>
> https://www.ethnologue.com/about/language-status
>
>
>
>
>
> Yours,
>
> Mats
>
>
>
> ---
>
> Mats Dufberg
>
> DNS Specialist, IIS
>
> Mobile: +46 73 065 3899 <+46%2073%20065%2038%2099>
>
> https://www.iis.se/en/
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Bill Jouris <bill.jouris at insidethestack.com>
> *Reply-To: *Bill Jouris <bill.jouris at insidethestack.com>
> *Date: *Monday 5 June 2017 at 17:38
> *To: *Mats Dufberg <mats.dufberg at iis.se>, "ahmedbakhat at yahoo.com" <
> ahmedbakhat at yahoo.com>
> *Cc: *Latin GP <latingp at icann.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [Latingp] Minutes from the call on May 30, 2017
>
>
>
> Given the enormous number of languages involved, perhaps it would be
> better to establish which ones will be *included* at this time.  That is,
> go for inclusion, rather than exclusion.
>
>
>
> And then, separately, principles and processes for including the
> occasional additional codepoint, if a language which we did not get thru in
> this initial effort requires it.
>
>
>
> Bill Jouris
> Inside Products
> bill.jouris at insidethestack.com
> 831-659-8360 <(831)%20659-8360>
> 925-855-9512 <(925)%20855-9512> (direct)
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Mats Dufberg <mats.dufberg at iis.se>
> *To:* "ahmedbakhat at yahoo.com" <ahmedbakhat at yahoo.com>
> *Cc:* Latin GP <latingp at icann.org>
> *Sent:* Monday, June 5, 2017 3:09 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [Latingp] Minutes from the call on May 30, 2017
>
>
>
> Ahmed,
>
>
>
> If you start with MSR -- or actually MSR2 -- and try to find languages
> that support the inclusion of its code points you would never be able to
> confirm that no code points outside of MSR2 that are needed to support the
> languages that the Latin GP wants to support. I do not say that such code
> points will be included, but we should be aware of any limitation in the
> support of the languages that are claimed to be supported.
>
>
>
> If there is any code point in MSR2 not used by any language we would have
> to investigate every language anyway to confirm that the code point can be
> excluded.
>
>
>
> Besides the Latin code points there are non-spacing marks that are used in
> combination with Latin code points. Those combinations could have different
> status in language, either being considered to be a character on its own or
> being a modified character. In the repertoire that the Latin GP suggests
> that such non-spacing marks are limited to just those combinations that are
> really used in the languages that the group wants to support. To find those
> combinations we have to investigate all languages.
>
>
>
> Another aspect is that the method of going code point by code point in MS2
> requires that we already know where to find what we are looking for. And
> when you start studying the material for a language, the hardest step can
> be to find sources and understanding what they say. After that it could be
> more straight forward to extract the characters. -- I do not claim that the
> task is simple. In my work for ICANN Pre-Delegation Testing, I have already
> done that. There are many grey areas, but that is our task to dig into.
>
>
>
> There is no other way than going through all the languages.
>
>
>
>
>
> Yours,
>
> Mats
>
>
>
> ---
>
> Mats Dufberg
>
> DNS Specialist, IIS
>
> Mobile: +46 73 065 3899 <+46%2073%20065%2038%2099>
>
> https://www.iis.se/en/
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *<latingp-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Ahmed Bakhat via Latingp
> <latingp at icann.org>
> *Reply-To: *"ahmedbakhat at yahoo.com" <ahmedbakhat at yahoo.com>
> *Date: *Sunday 4 June 2017 at 15:35
> *To: *"textualsolutions at gmail.com" <textualsolutions at gmail.com>, Mirjana
> Tasić <Mirjana.Tasic at rnids.rs>
> *Cc: *Latin GP <latingp at icann.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [Latingp] Minutes from the call on May 30, 2017
>
>
>
> I raised the issue during the to meeting work on Repertoire, as this group
> has yet not started its meetings, to devise principles for inclusion /
> exclusion, so ghat we should have solid grounds to include code points.
> Furthermore, some one has to present on behalf of the group, what we have
> done and what is the way forward.
>
>
>
> Regarding my email containing draft principles, I wanted to communicate
> that before going for any strategy ( either inclusion of code ponits on the
> basis of language or on the basis of MSR) we should have principles for it.
> In my perception it would be easy to go for MSR is much easy as compared to
> languages, as it would take years to finish 180 languages.
>
> It doesn't mean at all that we will start from zero, Marjina has already
> done most of the work,  so we can quickly go through it and work on rest of
> the code points.
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
>
>
> Ahmed Bakht
>
>
>
>
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> <https://overview.mail.yahoo.com/mobile/?.src=Android>
>
>
>
> On Sun, 4 Jun 2017 at 3:52 pm, Textual Solutions
>
> <textualsolutions at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> _______________________________________________
> Latingp mailing list
> Latingp at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/latingp
>
> _______________________________________________
> Latingp mailing list
> Latingp at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/latingp
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Latingp mailing list
> Latingp at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/latingp
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/latingp/attachments/20170606/fdab6084/attachment-0001.html>