Multi-Language Standards

["B. Tommie Usdin" <btusdin@mulberrytech.com>]

At the group's last telephone meeting I expressed concern about OASIS and
the promulgation of standards in many languages.  In this message I'll try
to articulate my concerns, recognizing that I don't really see any answers.


There are groups of people throughout the world who can usefully get
together to create the sort of shared specifications that OASIS technical
committees will be intended to support.  It is reasonable to assume that
for some of these activities the appropriate natural language in which to
work and the language in which the specification is most appropriately
written will not be a language widely used throughout the OASIS membership.

It seems to me that just as a TC should declare, as it is forming, what its
goals are, the target schedule of meetings and products, and the locations
of any planned meeting, it is reasonable for the group to declare the
language in which it will do business.  People who might otherwise be
interested in a group working on the XML-for-PerlDivers, for example, might
not be interested in joining this TC if the work is to be done in Malay.

The XML-for-PerlDivers TC can work within the OASIS process (assuming that
they have a copy of the OASIS TC Guidelines that they can read), and create
DTDs, Schemas, and documentation in Malay.  They can issue a Committee
Draft, and even a Committee Specification with no difficulty, because all
of the members of the committee can easily read the materials.

However, it seems to me that there is a problem in promoting
XML-for-PerlDivers into an OASIS Standard.  We have said that it takes a
vote of the OASIS membership to make something into an OASIS Standard, and
it is not reasonable to expect the OASIS membership as a whole to vote on
materials in Malay, or Welsh, or Japanese.  I wonder, as OASIS grows, if it
will be reasonable to expect the membership to be able to take informed
votes in any language (so far we seem to be a predominantly
English-speaking organization, but that may not last).

It was suggested that perhaps the membership should be encouraged to accept
the authority of the committee and approve the XML-for-PerlDivers
Specification as an OASIS Standard, but this strikes me as very dangerous;
it will significantly dilute the meaning of being an OASIS Standard.

Requiring TCs to translate their work product into a foreign (to them)
language (or worse, several languages) imposes significant problems,
including:
  - cost (good translations of technical materials are expensive)
  - time (""      ""        ""   ""       ""       take time)
  - conflict (which of the several versions is the version of record in
      case of conflict?)

OASIS could declare an official language. As far as I know OASIS has been
operating in English but has no official policy on language(s).  We could
require that all Committee Specifications be translated into the official
language as part of the process of nominating them to be OASIS Standards.
However, this is likely to drive many potential OASIS members away,
including some Japanese (who want to work in Japanese and are likely to
want to publish their specifications and standards in Japanese).  I find
this unattractive.  But I find the prospect of being asked to vote for or
against an OASIS Specification I can't read equally unattractive.

-- Tommie


======================================================================
B. Tommie Usdin                        mailto:btusdin@mulberrytech.com
Mulberry Technologies, Inc.                http://www.mulberrytech.com
17 West Jefferson Street                           Phone: 301/315-9631
Suite 207                                    Direct Line: 301/315-9634
Rockville, MD  20850                                 Fax: 301/315-8285
----------------------------------------------------------------------
  Mulberry Technologies: A Consultancy Specializing in SGML and XML

======================================================================