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: Event "XLIFF TC Call"- Summary

XLIFF TC Call - Summary
Date: Tuesday, 04 October 2011, 11:00am - 12:00pm ET
=== 1/ Roll call

Presents: Rodolfo, Yves, Bryan, Helena, Peter, Lucia, Tom, Christian, Joachim, Fredrik, David-F, Arle,
Regrets: Steven

=== 2/ Approve Tuesday, 06 September 2011 meeting minutes:

Bryan moves to approves the minutes
Tom seconds
No objections

=== 3/ Sub Committee Reports

--- 1.  Inline text (Yves)

Report from Yves: last meeting was Sep-13
Summary is here: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff-inline/201109/msg00010.html
We marked a few items as “stable” only two items left “under discussion”
There was a consensus to avoid dealing with error handling in the specification. If there is an error, the document is invalid and no additional processing expectation is provided in the specification.
Latest (very early) draft is here: http://tools.oasis-open.org/version-control/svn/xliff/trunk/inline-markup/

--- 2. XLIFF Promotion and Liaison SC Charter

-- a.  XLIFF Symposium Debrief

Peter: about 55-60 attendees (high quality ones)
Many decision makers, developers in the group.


- Microsoft case study (Kevin O'Donnell and Uwe Stahlschmidt)
Peter hopeful they will join the TC.

- Acronis (Kirill Soloviev)
Showed how XLIFF had saved a lot of money by having their product in the intl market faster

- also student evaluation, showing XLIFF can be applied to business use (if you know what you are doing)

Other presentations/panels provided input on what the TC should be doing.
e.g. more modular and tighter XLIFF.

Some suggested that TAUS should be either completely involved or not.
David and I made the point we'd like to have them in the TC.

DavidF: TAUS in its way to be joining.

Lucia: Thanks to Peter for the organization
Many people were asking to join the TC.
Some worried about the amount of work involved. But was good event to promote TC participation.

Several noted that XLIFF need to be "sold" and "promoted".

Bryan: need to think about how to harvest the feedback.

-- b. Decide on Sending Bryan as an ETSI ISG liaison
Pros: Early warning, In accordance with amended ETSI <-> OASIS MOU
Cons: Our liaison will be bound with ETSI confidentiality
Note: Our sending liaison does not construe endorsement, it is rather
necessity in order to see what is happening to TMX.
Far Fetched Pro: Might detect opportunity for having an OASIS TC for 
further development of some OSCAR standards in collaboration with ETSI,
i.e. with all rights.

DavidF: would like to initiate liaison talk with ETSI ISG
Issue is to avoid losing visibility with TMX and other ex-OSCAR standards.

Bryan: I'm part of ETSI ISG now, looking at what the confidentiality limits are.
Not attended a meeting yet.
Bryan: No obstacle to be the liaison

DavidF: moves that approve Bryan at the TC liaison with ISG
Helena: example of confidentiality issues?
DavidF: e.g Arle could not disclose part of minutes to the TC without an approval.
No specific issue.
Helena: so far nothing interesting on the technical side to report anyway.
Helena seconds DavidF to have Bryan as liaison

Rodolfo: don't expect issue otherwise it wouldn't be an open standard
Helena: nothing in the agreement suggest long term confidentiality on tech work.
Maybe just on progress.

Christian: maybe a SC topic?

Rodolfo: (reverse ballot): anyone opposed to have Bryan as liaison?
No one.
Bryan approved as the TC liaison with ETSI ISG

Peter: opacity of the ISG WG may be a problem.
DavidF: one possibility and common WG (e.g. at OASIS)

Bryan: Accept the nomination, will try to report as much as possible.
Will note any red flags.

-- c. Filter current business items and officially drop most of them to SC
Pros: More time for technical work, and that was the point of having SC
Cons: Lost direct visibility, Info only through SC minutes and reports, unless SC member

Bryan: sorted out the different items
SC minutes are available

=== 4/ Charter Draft (David F.)

--- 1. Ballot on Feature Approval
(new URL http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201110/msg00004.html)

DavidF: important we approve/not the procedure ASAP.
Bryan: agree, will underline it for next agenda

ACTION ITEM: all to be ready to vote on this next meeting.

=== 6/ Current XLIFF business

--- 1. Editing/Translating XLIFF - State-of-affairs of Tool Support (Christian)

More complicated. Don't know if it should be moved or not.
Christian: no answers, so many important only to me?
Lucia: interested on this point as well.
Idea is to continue Micah's work. 
Create questionnaire for developer so we get more data, compile the result
And publish it in the wiki (with disclaimer)
DavidF: maybe not critical to the current work.
Would take it on the SC if ok with Christian/Rodolfo
Rodolfo: fine with it.
Peter: think it's important. SC for this is fine.
Bryan: need to make distinction between general important topic and 2.0 specific topic.

Christian: fine as well. Only concern is timeline (need something now)
What I need: "is something produced by tool A can be consumed by tools B and C"
Maybe quick start on this would be nice.
DavidF: so far only matrix is available.
Discussion for SC
Joachim: same here, that's info deciders are looking for.
Querying the tool developers is a good idea.
Peter: survey may not catch interoperability issues
Will be rough estimation
Lucia: don't want to step on anyone toes :) Can work with others.

Peter: do we need join meeting between IN! and TC?
Rodolfo: same as for TAUS. They should join completely or not.
Peter: no quite the same thing.
Bryan: for membership individual vs company: up to each participant.

DavidF: should move IN! discussions to SC
Peter: Gabor (MemoQ) should join TC shortly.

--- 2. XLIFF Symposium 1 Debrief: "Voice of our customer" (Christian)
(move this to P&L SC?) (add XLIFF Symposium 2?)

Done. SC should prepare report. (whole #2)
None opposed

--- 3. XLIFF Spec in XLIFF (Lucia)
 (move this to XLIFF 2.0?)

--- 4. Using remaining Multilingual Web Events (e.g. in Limerick) as
an opportunity to talk about the current state and the possible
future of XLIFF (Christian)
(move this to P&L SC?)

--- 5. XLIFF:Doc representation guide (Yves)


=== 7/ New Business


Admin ACTION ITEM: Yves to re-issue teleconference with also European numbers (if possible)
Admin ACTION ITEM: Yves to check maximum attendees possible on GTM

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