[trans-ws] Meeting Minutes - 27 Feb 03

[Tony Jewtushenko <Tony.Jewtushenko@oracle.com>]

Meeting Minutes:  27 Feb 03

Attendance: 
Present: Peter, Tony, Milan, Ian, Paul, Anrezej, Arle, Joeri, Steve Holmes,
Bill, and Steve Flinter
Apologies: Paul


1. Mintues: Last week’s minutes are amended to reflect addition of Stephan
Flinter and Joeri as present.  Motion by  Steve Flinter,  Peter Seconded

2. Continue review of Bill’s proposal: 
> 1.    Query:
> > a.    Issue raised by Steven Holmes that the Query is too detailed
> > and should be broken down into a couple of different 
> > b.    Suggest that Query process can be broken down as follows: 
> > c.    Discovery ,  due diligence / negotiation,  run test,  do translation, 
> > QA test.
> > d.    The discussion continued with varying opinions on how much detail would
> > be required in the Query process.
> > e.    Bill suggested that we consider web services should reflect fundtionality
> > that would be built into any translation web portal.
> > f.    Arle mentioned that the http://www.lisa.org/map service already lists
> > many pieces of information that could be relevant.  It was agreed that the
> > taxonomy of this directory could be useful as a starting point for future
> > UDDI registry.  This could be combined with the work that the 2 Steve’s submitted
> > previously.
> > g.    Bill recommended that the Query Support function should be reasonably
> > flexible, and not require a standardized XML   Tony disagreed and suggested
> > that we should standardize on a core bit of data and permit extensions via
> > private namespace. Boils down to how much of an element of exchange we want
> > to support.  
> > h.    Was suggested that we may move towards using subcommittees to drill
> > down on these discussions.
> >   
> 2.    Request Quote: 
> > a.    Bill walked the group through the proposal
> > b.    It was pointed out that special equipment, tools or other related extra
> > costs or factors would impacts and isn’t included in the proposal.
> > c.    Conversion of data as a task to be completed within the translation
> > work mentioned either, and other tasks would influence costs as well.
> > d.  Turnaround time for the job should also be added (ie, for very fast turnaround,
> > there’s a premium to be paid).
> > e.  Question was raised regarding how procedural information gets to the
> > vendor?
> >   
> > > i.    A “readme” file will be part of what’s passed in to
> > > serve as a “catch-all” to describe the job (ie,  what should or shouldn’t
> > > be translated,  etc).  
> > > ii.    The freeform readme file could be sent on as a SOAP attachement, 
> > > or possibly sent afterwards as a mail attachment. 
> > > iii.    It was mentioned that XLIFF can capture this info, and would be preferable,
> > > but shouldn’t be a requirement. 
> > >     
> >   
> > f.   Request Quote should be linked to Query Support so that
> > the info is in parallel. 
> > g.  Discussion again returned to list of Query services and what would be
> > realistically suggeseted.  For example,  although a vendor hasn’t been translated
> > Klingon before,  it doesn’t mean they can’t.  Therefore, request quote should
> > provide a “we’ll give it a go” section”.
> > h.  Request quote and send job should be basically the same as Request Quote
> > i.   If Rejecting quote, reasons for rejection should be listed (ie, too
> > expensive, too long a turnaround).
> > j.   Reject quote, with a “price tolerance” field included?
> > k.  It’s assumed that most negotiation will often take place between humans
> > rather than through the web service.
> >   
> 3.    Accept quote – 
> > a.    Need Reference to a job ticket, so some form of persistence
> > with respect to the job number is necessary.
> > b.    “Upload data” in proposal refers to location of payload of data to
> > be localized..  The URL to the data will be reachable via FTP, HTTP, or other.
> > c.    Next week, will divide up the work more granularly between members
> > of the TC (sort of like subcommittees, but informal)
> >   
3. Face – to – face meeting, maybe in May, where we can get a lot of the
work done.  Spend 2 days in order to jump start the actual work on the standard.   
Will want to have suggestions for date sent before next week.  Suggest Dublin
as location ,  since many people are already in Dublin.

4.Next meeting in 2 weeks – 13 Mar

5. Meeting adjourned

-- 
Tony Jewtushenko				mailto:tony.jewtushenko@oracle.com
Sr. Tools Program Manager			direct tel: +353.1.8039080
Product Management - Tools Technology Team
Oracle Corporation, Ireland