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] Next steps regarding your very useful XLIFF 2.0 Public Review comments

Hi Bryan,

Thanks a lot for your feedback. This looks very good indeed, and I'm looking forward to the revised version of the specification. And, of course, some of my comments are still open...

Regarding the Glossary module it will be also my pleasure to further discuss remaining issues with Ryan.

One question: How is the OASIS process with resolving comments, e.g. do you need my "official" acceptance of the proposed solution(s), which would be similar to the W3C process?

Thanks, and all the best,


On July 01, 2013 at 23:30 (CEST), Schnabel, Bryan S wrote:

On behalf of the TC, I want to again thank you for the very useful
comments. As you know, we are tracking them here on our wiki

In an effort to not fill your inbox with individual replies, I hope you
don’t mind that I will reply to them, but comment number, in this single

Several were simply accepted at face value, and will be implemented (as
documented on the wiki). Also, you and Yves have continued your
discussions publically on the comment list.

I will address the remainder here.

csprd01 015 - Processing Requirements for XML PIs: This was also called
to our attention in comment 013. We had an electronic ballot
(https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ballot.php?id=2432 ), and voted
to say the Processing Instructions SHOULD be preserved.

csprd01 018 - Structure and Structural Elements: Glossary module: This
is also covered in comment 024. We are very close to resolving this. We
discussed this at the Face to Face meeting in London and came to
(https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201306/msg00009.html), We
then held a ballot
and voted to remove Glossary from File. In summary: A] make Glossary
Module more expressive: 1) make <glossentry> extensible by both elements
and attributes, 2) make children extensible by attributes, 3) Introduce
id to be able to reference back from <mrk type="term">; B] Remove
<glossary> from <file>

Ryan King is the owner of this topic and will be happy to follow up if
you have further questions.

csprd01 025 - Format Style Module: I am grateful for this good advice. I
will add a robust, more sophisticated example that supports images.

csprd01 026 - Metadata Module: This is also tied to comment 048. I think
it is very good advice. I will add the example you suggest.

Prior to the second public review I will send you a link to the improved
specification that incorporated the comments you sent, and I will ask
for your opinion of the resolution of your comments.

Thank you,


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