Editing/Translating XLIFF - State-of-affairs of Tool Support

Dear all,

recent research on tools for Editing/Translating XLIFF has resulted in quite a bit of uncertainty with respect to the current state-of-affairs: I am unsure if lists (see examples below) that I saw in the past are still up-to-date/adequate. I think it would be cool, to see the following information in comprehensive, updated list:

1. Tool/Product Name and Version

2. Vendor (if applicable)

3. General Category (e.g. along the lines of Micah’s categories “Generators” and “Editors”)

4. Able to take XLIFF 1.2 as input

5. Able to produce XLIFF 1.2 as output

6. Installation: required/not required (e.g. purely browser-/cloud-based)

7. System requirements (especially for tools which require installation): Mac, Windows (version), Linux, other

8. Commercial/Non-Commercial (price range/license type)

9. Estimated User base (e.g. 500 from all over the globe)

10. (Estimated) Status (e.g. “last update from 8/2004; thus, presumably defunct)

11. Web Site

I would even tend to add at least a couple of easy approaches to XML editing (to make http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/xliff/faq.php#HowToTrans a little easier to realize).

I realize that gathering this information poses difficulties such as the following:

1. An single implementation may be behind two different tools/products, and thus it may for example be difficult to get to the “estimated user base”

2. Since the spec for XLIFF 1.2 does not come with conformance clauses, the “Able to take XLIFF 1.2 as input” and “Able to produce XLIFF 1.2 as output” might be contentious (you may remember the discussion around the matrix on which Lucia worked)

3. Especially in advanced scenarios (e.g. in processes in which several tools are involved, or in for complex native formats) details such as “approach to inline markup” may be extremely relevant

Nevertheless, I am under the impression that it should be possible to get to a list/table like the above – and that it would be valuable even if the granularity is coarse/details may be missing . My own experience is that once people are convinced that XLIFF is a good thing, they immediately ask questions such as “OK, now that I produce the XLIFF where is the easy to install FOSS editor for Windows 7 that I can give to people so that they can easily manipulate/translate the XLIFF”. So far me – and presumably others as well – cannot answer. Thus, the XLIFF enthusiast may be discouraged pretty fast … (see quiz below J )

If I remember correctly, we discussed possible approaches for putting together and publishing the list. We ended up with a request for funding which could not be fulfilled. My own little brainstorming for alternatives is the following:

1. If OK from the Wikipedia point-of-view, encourage that the list on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XLIFF#XLIFF_Related_Tools is turned into a table that captures this information mentioned above

2. Solicit mails to xliff-comments which follow a naming convention for the subject line (e.g. “Add/modify Entry to XLIFF Implementations List: <Tool/Product Name> <Version>); content from mails will consolidated by us (possibly by a sub-committee) on a new page on the XLIFF TC Wiki

Best regards,

Christian

P.S.: Thanks to those of you who encouraged this mail, and provided suggestions.

P.P.S.: Quiz. How would you currently respond to

- How do I safely manipulate/translate XLIFF with standard Windows 7 tools?

- Where is the easy to install FOSS editor for Windows 7 that I can give to people so that they can easily manipulate/translate the XLIFF?

Sample lists:

• http://xliff-tools.freedesktop.org/wiki/

• http://www.localisation.ie/xliff/resources/presentations/xliff_tools_matrix_20100922.numbers.pdf

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XLIFF#XLIFF_Related_Tools

xliff message