RE: [xliff-comment] FW: Your comment, 016: Structure and Structural Elements: comparison with the previous 1.2

["Schnabel, Bryan S" <bryan.s.schnabel@tektronix.com>]

Hi Jörg,

Thank you for the very welcome message of support for this approach. I think the W3C Primer is quite analogous. 

I was very encouraged by this statement from you:

> I might even support the TC in drafting it.

Your support would be very much appreciated!

But I should warn you, my good friend David Filip watches this list pretty thoroughly. And he is a merciless recruiter for potential stars like yourself to join the TC. If you're not careful he might swoop in and try to persuade you to join XLIFF!

;)

Thanks,

Bryan

-----Original Message-----
From: Jörg Schütz [mailto:joerg@bioloom.de] 
Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2013 9:34 AM
To: Schnabel, Bryan S
Cc: xliff-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [xliff-comment] FW: Your comment, 016: Structure and Structural Elements: comparison with the previous 1.2

Hi Bryan,

That's a very good idea to make such a comparison paper available to the community. It fosters the understanding of the new release, and what has been accomplished, and thus makes its adoption easier. Maybe this paper could be something that W3C working groups name "Primer."

Please keep me informed on the paper's progression, and certainly I might even support the TC in drafting it.

Thanks and cheers -- Jörg

On Aug 17, 2013 at 01:10 (CEST), Schnabel, Bryan S wrote:
> Hi Jörg,
>
> I just wanted to inform you about the actions taken by the XLIFF 
> Technical Committee regarding the very useful comment you made during 
> the public review period for our pending XLIFF 2.0 release, comment 016:
> Structure and Structural Elements: comparison with the previous 1.2. 
> As you know, we are tracking the progress we make on the comments 
> received, publically, on our wiki 
> (https://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/XLIFF%202.0%20Public%20Review%20submitted%20comments%20tracker).
>
> The  TC very much agreed that this will be most useful to the community.
> But rather than putting the comparison in the specification, we came 
> to consensus that the more appropriate, and compelling place to 
> publish the information will be to provide a comparison as an OASIS 
> Technical Committee draft. David will propose a strict deadline to be 
> sure the information get to the community in a timely manner.
>
> I hope you find this action satisfactory. The TC is most grateful for 
> your suggestion. We think this will be of great value to the community.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Bryan
>