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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

xliff message

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

Subject: Re: [xliff] Groups - Standing XLIFF Teleconference (Bi-Weekly)modified

Hi Yves:

Yes,  the filenaming conventions have been changing frequently and 
you're right that it's only a draft.  Before you make any changes,  I'll 
get official clarification from Karl Best - I agree with you that we 
should do is create a URL named xliff-core-1.1-cs.html that links into 
xliff-specification.html.  This would be the least work-intensive option 
for us.


Yves Savourel wrote:

>Sorry I didn't know we had a new version of the filename conventions. But
>you will note that:
>1- That illustrates the problem with OASIS recommendation: if they had a
>mechanism for which there is a unique filename to look at, regardless of the
>version, I would have pointed at the latest specifications for filename.
>2- They don't respect their own convension, that document is a working
>draft, and should be named
>chairs-filenaming-1.0-draft-02.html not chairs-filenaming-02.html.
>Also, without an additional field (revison number or date) it's going to be
>difficult to keep track of fixes.
>I guess we should call the latest version of 1.1 xliff-core-1.1-cs.html and
>just link to it from xliff-specification.html. The main problem is that
>there are already many links to the specifications and they go to
>xliff-specification.html, not to the various filenames OASIS keeps comming
>up with (it's still a working draft...).
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Tony Jewtushenko [mailto:tony.jewtushenko@oracle.com]
>Sent: Tue, August 05, 2003 8:36 AM
>To: ysavourel@translate.com
>Cc: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org
>Subject: Re: [xliff] Groups - Standing XLIFF Teleconference
>The OASIS document naming requirements
>(http://www.oasis-open.org/spectools/docs/chairs-filenaming-02.html) require
>us to save our Committee Spec to the following naming convention:
>xliff-core-1.1-cs.html.  Date number suffix is specifically not recommended
>for the Committee Spec version.   The standards review process requires that
>we abide by all the OASIS rule and requirements.
>Yves - can you please upload the correct comittee spec with the OASIS
>approved file name?
>Yves Savourel wrote:
>Hi John,
>To answer one of your question:
>4/Standards Review Process - the approvals process and timing.
>At this meeting we will vote on the timing of the submission to
>the OASIS standards review process. Chair proposes that we submit
>the XLIFF 1.1 spec, Schema and Whitepaper for peer review
>starting 11 Aug and ending 24 September 2003. Proposed reviewers
>are: all OASIS TC's, LISA OSCAR, W3C i18n WG, and possibly LRC.
>Coverage rosters for monitoring and responding to comments and
>queries during the review process will be drawn up. If not enough
>coverage is available during August due to holidays, etc, then
>we'll push out the review period start date to early September.
>FYI: document names for specs, schema's etc, are being reviewed
>and modified in accordance with OASIS naming conventions.
></jr>The submission text is good. However, we have a 20030522 and
>a 20030625 cs-core-xliff-1.1 version of the document. What is
>different in the 20030625 version? We point at the 20030522 in
>most places but when Latest version: is selected the 20030625
>document comes up. This is a bit confusing. Can we clean this up?
>I vote to approve once these issues are resolved, if possible.
>The latest version of the specification to refere to is ALWAYS:
>(no date). The ones with date are there for history (same mechanism as for
>W3C specifications). Obviously in same case you may want to refer to a
>specific version.
>The change versions are also normaly indicated in the "Changes Since
>Previous Version" appendix. In this case the change between 20030522 and
>20030625 is a correction in the XSD file (we had a duplicated entries
>"pageheader" for the datatype values, it needed to be one "pageheader" and
>one "pagefooter"). Since the attributes values are also listed in the
>specification (automatically generated from the XSD file), it had to be
>updated too.
>Good luck at your dentist (I went through that yesterday :)
>You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting
>Tony Jewtushenko					mailto:tony.jewtushenko@oracle.com
>Principal Product Manager				direct tel: +353.1.8039080
>ST Tools Technology Team
>Oracle Corporation, Ireland
>You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/xliff/members/leave_workgroup.php

Tony Jewtushenko					mailto:tony.jewtushenko@oracle.com
Principal Product Manager				direct tel: +353.1.8039080
ST Tools Technology Team
Oracle Corporation, Ireland

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