XLIFF Teleconference - Summary

[Yves Savourel <ysavourel@translate.com>]

XLIFF Teleconference - Summary
Date:  Tuesday, 21 June 2011

=== Agenda:
1/ Roll call

Presents: Yves, Bryan, Rodolfo, Tom, Christian, Helena, David-F, Arle (later), Andrew (later)
Regrets: Arle (but joined later), Lucìa, Peter


=== 2/ Approve Tuesday, 17 May 2011 meeting minutes:
   Accept, reject, or amend.
(http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201106/msg00007.html)

Bryan moves to accept the minutes.
David-F: small amendment: ETSI is allowing only FRAND IP mode.
Rodolfo second with this amendment.
No objections.


=== 3/ Sub Committee Reports

Inline text (Yves)
Yves was away. See notes from Arle:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff-inline/201106/msg00003.html
Yves to gather list of elements for Rodolfo's schema.


4/ XLIFF 2.0 (http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/XLIFF2.0/FeatureTracking)

Rodolfo has maintain an experimental schema.
Question of core vs. modules
Maybe need to touch on the mechanism we're using to track the work.


=== 4.1. XLIFF 2.0 Core

--- a. Segmentation - Yves, et al.
begin: (http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201104/msg00005.html)
most recent (http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201104/msg00034.html)

--- b. Philosophy of core vs. modules - David W.
 (http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201104/msg00020.html)
and (http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201105/msg00024.html)

=== 4.2. XLIFF 2.0 Modules

--- a. Rodolfo's latest schema with examples and two optional modules
(http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201105/msg00023.html)
     
--- b. Compliance - Rodolfo, Yves
(http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201104/msg00031.html)
- note, shall we table compliance until we begin Conformance criteria discussion?

--- c. Crossover aligned segments - Yves 
(http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201105/msg00038.html)

Discussion about the cross-over segments.
Current attribute should be ok. Yves to try implementation
Discussion about "ignorable"
May take a lot of space to mark them up.
May be able to use reference to skeleton
May be able to point to a place where repeated span of data can be pointed to.
Skeleton type depends on type of original file (e.g. HTML vs some binary file can't be handled the same way).
Same of trans-unit (repetitions) entries that are repeated
But translation may be different.
DITA has conref: maybe we could used something like that for ignorable.
And possibly for source text too.
Even further: re-use of "topic"
We have not started to discuss the skeleton, topic worth to discuss at some point.

New topic: repeatable / referenceable
Rodolfo: will try to come up with schema change to explore this.
Let's make sure we have those on record (http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/XLIFF2.0/FeatureTracking)

Rodolfo: should we use David's work plan vs wiki?
Bryan: not sure both are mutually exclusive
Wiki to start documentation
Think we could start a draft specification
It could help us to keep track where we are and our focus
Wiki for tracking feature
Rodolfo: should I start docbook draft?
David-F: currently the draft working charter has no plan yet
Could reference the wiki tracking page
Timeline/priority would go to charter

Access to the docbook source on version control?
Rodolfo: yes, SVN server
Bryan: need ground rules about making sure people working on the file don't break it.
Open-source and commercial tools available to edit docbook.



=== 6/ Current XLIFF business 

--- 6.1. Alternate meeting focused on Current Business?

May need another regular call for current business.
For example new meeting once a month on the 4th Tuesday of the month,
Or after the SC meeting on the second Tuesday of the month
Rodolfo: or maybe 90mn vs 60mn?
Issue for Bryan
Helena: frankly some of those topics are not interesting. Maybe some of those discussion could be off-line and on a ad-hoc basis.
Bryan: to summarize: current business may be bloated and we could trim it so we don't need extra meeting.
Probably a temporary situation
David-F: having separate meeting would allow people not interested to not attend. Transparency is important.
Helena: some of those discussions may need to be done not at the schedule time of the planned meeting.
Rodolfo: same for me, prefer the tech stuff.
Helena: those topics should not drive away the focus we need to have.
Bryan: alas some of those topics need discussions. Prefer the tech stuff too.
Could make those current-business meeting not mandatory
Helena: if not mandatory and no voting decision are taken there then it's ok.
Arle: stating time limit could be a way to enforce a better disposal of the issues.

Will continue the current-business discussion on email.


=== 7/ New Business

None

-end-