Subject: Re: [xliff-comment] Comment on XLIFF 2.0 30 day draft
> ... I would strongly urge the TC to pursue multiple independent
> implementations of the format before finalizing the specification inA big +1 on that sentiment.
> order to flush out problems that are not immediately apparently
> during the reading.
I don't understand why OASIS has no requirement to have at least two implementations before a specification can move to standard,
like in the W3C.
This publicly archived list offers a means to provide input to the
OASIS XML Localisation Interchange File Format (XLIFF) TC.
In order to verify user consent to the Feedback License terms and
to minimize spam in the list archive, subscription is required
List help: email@example.com
List archive: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff-comment/
Feedback License: http://www.oasis-open.org/who/ipr/feedback_license.pdf
List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
Join OASIS: http://www.oasis-open.org/join/