RE: XLIFF TC Charter for 2.0

Hi Bryan,

It’s always a good idea to update the charter periodically; it looks like it’s been a couple of years. The TC should take the time to make any necessary updates and then submit to me and I can run the ballot. The key distinction is to make sure you’re not expanding the scope. If it’s just an update (1.2 to 2.0, new dates, etc.) then a clarification is all that is required. If the scope is being expanded (to cover new work not described in the charter presently) then a recharter would be warranted.

Regards,

Mary

From: bryan.s.schnabel@tektronix.com [mailto:bryan.s.schnabel@tektronix.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 4:14 PM
To: mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org
Cc: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: XLIFF TC Charter for 2.0

Hi Mary,

Could you please coach us on the best path for us to take regarding our charter? Given our conclusion of work, and passing XLIFF 1.2, and the TC's agreement that our next significant work will be XLIFF 2.0, we want to be sure our charter is up-to-date, and reflects the newest set of goals. Are we required to do Charter clarification (http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php#charterClarification), or Recharter (http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php#rechartering), or are we permitted to continue under our current charter (http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/xliff/charter.php)? I'm not asking you to look into your crystal ball and spirit up the future of XLIFF 2.0 against the current charter (though if you really could, I wouldn't stop you!). I was just a bit unclear about the requirements when a TC advances to the next version of its specification.

I think minimally we'd need to update the charter to reflect the fact that XLIFF 1.2 passed and is an OASIS Standard now.

In re-reading the existing charter, my personal opinion is that it is a bit stale, and needs some wordsmithing. But I'm not entirely sure it fails to reflect our current goals (a discussion for the TC to have, for sure).

Thanks,

Bryan

xliff message