OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

xliff-comment message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: RE: [xliff-comment] XLIFF 2.0 Comments


This is very useful feedback. I appreciate that you divided your comments into a (1) General Overview (to give us helpful context for understanding the details that follow), followed by an actionable list of comments on (2) Core, (3) Attributes, and (3) Modules. And the points you make in the (4) Conclusion are also very useful. We can check our thinking against the bias you identified, and look toward the inspiration you cite.

For purposes of taking action on your comments, I've taken each point in your sections (2), (3), and (4), and added them to our comments tracker (which is public) https://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/XLIFF%202.0%20Public%20Review%20submitted%20comments%20tracker 

Please feel free take a look to make sure that I parsed and characterized your comments accurately.

We will assign a TC member to each comment and we will contact you with a summary of our actions relative to your comments.

Thank you, and please continue to communicate with us as you see fit.

- Bryan Schnabel, XLIFF TC Chair

-----Original Message-----
From: Jörg Schütz [mailto:joerg@bioloom.de] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 4:40 AM
To: xliff-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [xliff-comment] XLIFF 2.0 Comments

Dear XLIFF TC Member,

Please find attached comments/observations/questions/ideas concerning the XLIFF 2.0 working draft dated April 16, 2032 (http://docs.oasis-open.org/xliff/xliff-core/v2.0/csprd01/xliff-core-v2.0-csprd01.html). 
  Please feel free to contact me for clarifications if anything is unclear.

One of the important benefits of a standardized localization interchange format is to ensure interoperability between the different processes and employed tools involved in the localization supply chain, which certainly may vary from use case to use case. Although the actual requirements on what interoperability -- syntactically and semantically
-- means, and the associated needs and demands of a specific
(enterprise) case may differ in various degrees, there should be consensus about a common set of features that need to be addressed for a seamless interchange of data and metadata. Reading the draft with this assumption in mind, I hope that the proposed modifications and additions help to accomplish the goal of interoperability. I apologize in advance if a reply to my comments may require that discussions which presumably already took place may have to be summarized.

Best regards,


*Prof. Dr. Jörg Schütz* *|* bioloom group *|* Bahnhofstr. 12 *|* D-66424 Homburg *|* Fon +49-6841-756-338 *|* Mobile +49-170-801-9982 *|* joerg.schuetz@bioloom.de

*bioloom group* *|* Vertreten durch / Represented by: Prof. Dr. Jörg Schütz *|* Sitz / Register: Homburg *|* USt-IdNr. / Tax-Id.: DE261087278
*|* Web: www.bioloom.de

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]