[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [xliff] OASIS XLIFF TC liaison with MultilingualWeb-LT
Hi David, I second the liaison with the Multilingual Web-LT. Regards, Joachim From: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:xliff@lists.oasis-open.org]
On Behalf Of Dr. David Filip Dear all, Hereby I propose to create a formal liaison with MultilingualWeb-LT and nominate Arle Lommel to serve as the first XLIFF TC liaison on MultilingualWeb-LT. The common interest of the groups has been described in previous messages.(details
of the proposal are below in this message). I am looking for a second. Best regards dF This is a concise mandate for the liason (to be used in an electronic ballot if seconded) Scope (work on and facilitation of the following):
Responsibilities: The liaison will report to the P&L SC, which in turn reports at least monthly to XLIFF TC. The main duties of the liaison at MultilingualWeb-LT shall be: 1) Ensure that XLIFF TC viewpoint (localization roundtrip) is well represented during the requirements gathering. 2) Follow up on queries and issues logged by XLIFF TC and its members to ensure that they are well addressed according to W3C WG process throughout draft, test suit, till final
recommendation. 3) Identify and promote opportunities for common non-normative best practice notes.
Dr. David Filip ======================= LRC | CNGL | LT-Web | CSIS University of Limerick, Ireland telephone: +353-6120-2781 cellphone: +353-86-0222-158 facsimile: +353-6120-2734 mailto:
david.filip@ul.ie
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 19:14, Dr. David Filip <David.Filip@ul.ie> wrote: Thanks Rodolfo, I agree with you that 2.0 is more important, but since MultilingualWeb-LT is mandated (and funded) until the end of 2013, they cannot wait for XLIFF 2.0. The understanding on the profile should be very low effort for XLIFF TC. In my view, the only thing the XLIFF TC needs to provide is a definition of profile for both 1.2 and 2.0. This seems a pressing need also in relation to other initiatives (ULI, IN!, GALA). I totally agree that the liaison should concentrate on securing semantic match with 2.0 and developing native support for ITS categories in 2.0 (feature under consideration, owned by Christian). I think that XLIFF TC should be aware of its standardization scope limits and embrace opportunities to influence developments of related standards in neighboring domains, so I disagree with your proposal to ignore the MultilingualWeb-LT
standardization activity and continue working without a formally established liaison. If XLIFF TC takes the opportunity to influence ITS successor development it will have much easier job supporting it. We simply cannot and must not ignore content life cycle metadata and continue building unrelated localization downstream
dreamboats. We have a genuine opportunity to push data categories that are relevant for localization process into an upstream standard, I urge the TC to use it. Best regards dF
Dr. David Filip ======================= LRC | CNGL | LT-Web | CSIS University of Limerick, Ireland telephone: +353-6120-2781 cellphone:
+353-86-0222-158 facsimile: +353-6120-2734 mailto:
david.filip@ul.ie
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 13:24, Rodolfo M. Raya <rmraya@maxprograms.com> wrote: Hi David, One of your listed work areas is:
2. Representation of MultilingualWeb-LT metadata using XLIFF 1.2
1. Have a "profile' or mutual understanding on the best practice We are working on XLIFF 2.0 now. We should not waste our efforts on XLIFF 1.2 if we
accept the liaison proposal. The fact that MultilingualWeb-LT has devised a dependency in our TC is not our problem
and should not be considered a motivating factor of any kind. We should not have any dependency on their work. If they want to provide a set of metadata
categories for common use, that would be nice. Nevertheless, we don’t have to wait for them.
If TC members want to work in both groups at the same time, that’s fine and could be
useful provided our work pace is not affected. Regards, Rodolfo -- From:
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:xliff@lists.oasis-open.org]
On Behalf Of Dr. David Filip Hi all, on last TC meeting I have proposed on behalf of the Promotion and Liaison subcommittee that we form a liaison relationship with
W3C MultilingualWeb-LT Working Group. The relationship between XLIFF TC and W3C Internationalization Activity has been traditionally good. We had on the 1st XLIFF symposium a presentation by Christian
Lieske and Prof. Felix Sasaki on the secret mariage between XLIFF and ITS. Now, P&L SC recommends to bring the relationship with the MultilingualWeb-LT working group (that has been mandated to produce an ITS successor) to the official liaison level. [See
WG Charter] MultilingualWeb-LT has named OASIS XLIFF TC as its only external dependency (relationship stronger than simple liaison, WG must officially respond to queries
and issues logged on behalf of XLIFF TC). MultilingualWeb-LT works on content metadata with localization roundtripping in mind; the main goal is to bridge the gap between content authoring and content
localization standards. The WG recognizes the importance of XLIFF as the pivotal localization standard that is critical for localization roundtripping. XLIFF TC considers having native support for ITS (feature C3 on wiki) Therefore there exist a few areas where the groups need to work together.
David Filip, co-chair of MultilingualWeb-LT, has been appointed MultilingualWeb-LT liaison at XLIFF TC. XLIFF Promotion and Liaison SC nominated Arle Lommel as XLIFF TC liaison at MultilingualWeb-LT. The liaison will report to the P&L SC, which in turn reports at least monthly to XLIFF TC. The main duties of the liaison at MultilingualWeb-LT shall be: 1) Ensure that XLIFF TC viewpoint (localization roundtrip) is well represented during the requirements gathering. 2) Follow up on queries and issues logged by XLIFF TC and its members to ensure that they are well addressed according to W3C WG process throughout draft, test
suit, till final recommendation. 3) Identify and promote opportunities for common non-normative best practice notes. Please use this week for discussion of pros and cons of having such a liaison. Unless the discussion reveals some grave issues that the P&L SC has not considered
so far, I will formally propose early next week an electronic ballot on forming this liaison as described above. Thanks and regards dF Dr. David Filip ======================= LRC | CNGL | LT-Web | CSIS University of Limerick, Ireland telephone: +353-6120-2781 cellphone:
+353-86-0222-158
facsimile: +353-6120-2734 mailto:
david.filip@ul.ie |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]