[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Fwd: [opendocument-users] ITS implementation in OD
(I had put Felix in Bcc of the original mail since I did not know whether he was or not on the lists, here are his comments. JC Helary) Begin forwarded message: > From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org> > Date: 2006年2月23日 14:35:57:JST > To: JC Helary <fusion@mx6.tiki.ne.jp> > Cc: opendocument-users@lists.oasis-open.org, > dev@xml.openoffice.org, Yves Savourel <ysavourel@translate.com> > Subject: Re: [opendocument-users] ITS implementation in OD > > Hi Jean-Christophe, > > I don't know why I am getting this mail, but I am very happy about it. > Many thanks for this! If my mail does not reach the > opendocument-users@lists.oasis-open.org and dev@xml.openoffice.org > lists, could you forward it? Many thanks in advance. I am sending this > also to Yves Savourel, the ITS working group chair. > > Just some comments below. > > JC Helary wrote: >> Robert, >> >> I fully understand your position. >> >> I invited Felix Sasaki (the current draft editor @ W3C) > > I am a co-editor of the spec, together with Christian Lieske (SAP AG). > However, my main role in the working group is that of a W3C staff > contact. I have to assure that the group succeeds with its work > (technically and in compliance with the w3c standardization process). > >> to make a >> presentation about ITS at a "translation and open source" seminar >> we had >> in Tokyo last month, held by Japan Jinux User Association and >> hosted by >> Sun Japan, and the message was clearly that W3C is waiting for either >> localization solutions vendors or document format maintainers to >> make a >> first step (even at the prototype level). > > Jean-Christophe is right that we are targeting on vendors and document > format maintainers; but as for the latter one, we are already > working on > concrete implementations (or 'modularizations'as we call it, see > http://www.w3.org/TR/its/#modularizations) of ITS in the formats > DocBook > (ongoing), TEI (done in a first version), DITA (ongoing), XHTML > (ongoing) and XML Spec (done in a first version). As you can see > in the > draft, ODF has already a placeholder, which we would like to fill. One > of our working group participants (from Sun) is working in that area. > >> >> I was doing a presentation about OmegaT >> (http://sourceforge.net/projects/omegat), as project member, and with >> native SX*/ODF support since pretty much OmegaT was conceived, we are >> extremely interested in implementing ITS based translation >> information >> parsing. The Japanese language quality resp. at Sun Japan was also >> there, making a presentation about OLT, and we could all feel that >> people are waiting for somebody to start something. >> >> I suppose ITS implementation in HTML will be handled by the W3C >> and as >> far as DocBook is concerned the relevant groups will handle that > > yes. > >> , but I >> am more interested in OD since I use it on a daily basis for >> translating >> MS documents (as a matter of fact, we are considering using JOOTT >> internally to get automatic conversion of MS docs). >> >> Implementing ITS in OD also means getting closer to emulating >> proprietary translation tools behaviors and with the recent moves >> to get >> Trados files available to OmegaT users through OOo/RTFStyler hacks >> (see >> LinuxForTranslators list and the OmegaT user group, both @ Yahoo) the >> community is really in need of a sign from the OD community :) >> >> If there is anything that can be done to implement an ITS >> prototype in >> OD, I can guaranty you that OmegaT would support that right away, at >> least to offer a test platform and see what the possibilities are. >> >> A lot of translation solution (proprietary) vendors are starting to >> implement OD support, and ITS, once it is finalized will most >> probably >> be the next standard to adopt in this field. >> >> Regards, >> Jean-Christophe >> >> On 2006/02/22, at 23:55, robert_weir@us.ibm.com >> <mailto:robert_weir@us.ibm.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> Speaking for myself, I like what ITS is trying to accomplish, but I >>> would hesitate to implement ITS support in ODF until ITS advances >>> closer to W3C Recommendation status. I believe it is current a W3C >>> Working Draft, meaning it is still open to changes based on public >>> feedback, etc. However, it may be worth evaluating ITS and thinking >>> what it could mean for ODF, while there still is opportunity for >>> us to >>> submit feedback to the ITS TC. > > it is the best opportunity now :) > We have just published an updated working draft of the ITS tagset > document at http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-its-20060222/ . > We are planning to publish a so-called "last-call" working draft > around > the end of May. "last call" means: that draft will have all > features of > ITS which we are proposing. Within the W3C specification development > process, the last-call review period (about a month) is the main > period > for comments on drafts. Nevertheless, the earlier we get feedback, the > better, and the more time we will have to discuss the feedback. So I > strongly encourage you to make comments on the current draft as > soon as > possible. You will find an explanation of how to do that in the > "status" > section at http://www.w3.org/TR/its/ . > > Best regards, > > Felix Sasaki > >>> >>> Thanks for bringing this specification to my attention. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> -Rob Weir >>> >>> JC Helary <fusion@mx6.tiki.ne.jp <mailto:fusion@mx6.tiki.ne.jp>> >>> wrote >>> on 02/22/2006 05:57:57 AM: >>> >>>> What is the status of ITS implementation in OD ? >>>> >>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/its/ >>>> >>>> Jean-Christophe Helary
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]