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: XLIFF teleconference Tuesday, 20 December 2011 - summary

XLIFF TC Teleconference
Tuesday, 20 December 2011, 11:00am - 12:00pm ET

=== 1/ Roll call

Present: Yves, Victor, Bryan, Deb, Shirley, Tom, Rodolfo, Fredrik, Christian, Helena, Andrew-P, Joachim
Regrets: David-W, David-F

New member: Andrew Pimlott (http://www.spartanconsultinginc.com/about/)

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

Bryan moves to approve the minutes
Helena seconds
No objections

=== 3/ Sub Committee Reports

--- 1. Inline text (Yves)

Minutes are here:

- Discussed the type of elements to use (ph/pc/sc/ec).
A ballot is currently active (will end Jan-8)

- Discussed validation. How much to do with XSD, which version, can other format (e.g RelaxNG) be used, etc.
SC felt this needs to be settled by TC.
See http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201112/msg00039.html

- Discussed uniqueness of attribute names.
Consensus in SC that using the same name in different element is best. E.g. a <ph type> and a <mrk type> are two distinct attributes with different values/description/etc. but the same name.
SC felt this needs to be settled by TC.
See http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201112/msg00038.html

- Discussed bidi marker Unicode vs markup.
No clear outcome yet. Seeking more expert advice.

--- 2. XLIFF Promotion and Liaison SC Charter (David)
a. Lucía tool survey


Skipped for today.

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

--- a. Core vs. Module – criteria:

Rodolfo: added the criteria to the draft as we voted (see SVN)
Just removed text about where the core/modules will be documented.

--- b. To extend or not to extend


--- c. Proposal to vote on adding formatting style attribute


--- d. Glossaries
(tied to wiki item http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/XLIFF2.0/FeatureTracking#XLIFF2.0.2BAC8-Feature.2BAC8-TermProposals.TermProposals)

Rodolfo: would like to add a module with the glossary inside XLIFF doc.
(as defined during previous discussion)
Not exactly the same as the item #21
This is form representing the whole glossary.

Christian: wonder if we should first define the term "glossary" and possibly specific requirements for it?

Rodolfo: can look at maxprograms web site article on GlossML. List of terms, not a format for terminology.
Something simple.

Christian: So your proposal is to include the GlossML model?

Bryan: Peter noted last time that according the TAUS survey many where thinking it was good for XLIFF to include everything in the XLIFF format.

Rodolfo: Yes, idea is to use the simple parts of GlossML. As an optional module.

Christian:  Rodolfo, could you please send a mail to the list that points to your article?

Rodolfo: http://www.maxprograms.com/articles/glossml.html

Helena: what about field/area of usage? Any definition for those?

Rodolfo: nothing restrictive, just an annotation (comment?)

Helena: so field/area of usage is not included?

Rodolfo: yes, just something *very* simple. Source term, target term, definition and possibly a comment.

Helena: so domain would be not included?

Rodolfo: correct.

Helena: agree because domain is not very well defined.
Maybe just source, target, and comment

Christian has to leave.

Bryan: For features: no need to have the whole solution in place, just a general overview for the proposal.
Then the owner goes and does the work.

Joachim: so source/target/and what?

Rodolfo: for now, just looking for interest on the general idea. We can work out the details later.

Helena: as a module. Found it valuable.

Joachim: where would it reside?

Rodolfo: could be at the file level (header), or the unit/segment level.

Yves: case of having it at text unit/segment-level is related to item #21

Joachim: having it at header would be nice too.

Bryan: +1

Rodolfo: will add the item to the wiki, and we can vote to move it to accepted feature next time.

Joachim: need to be sure it gives us something.
Easy to 'dump' the glossary there.
Maybe too easy?
Having it just at the segment-level may be better.

Bryan: maybe Joachim could be co-owner.

Joachim: sure.
Should we have both (header/segment-level) if both are useful.

Rodolfo: having just a limited list of terms at the header level could be useful too.

Joachim: marking up terms is easier for the server than the clients.

Rodolfo: could also have an empty glossary and add terms as we translated.

Joachim: yes, that's a legitimate use for header-level

Victor: glossary is normally prepared before so doing it during translation may not be valid.
Terminology and glossary are both valid but different.

Rodolfo: populating header-level glossary may be not a good use case.

Joachim: maybe start with segment-level?

Rodolfo: could be used as source to gather all terms.
Could even provide an XSL style-sheet for this.

Joachim: segment-level makes it very easy for tools maker to use the terms.

Bryan: need to move to current business
Rodolfo to start email thread on the glossary discussion.

--- e. Inline SC issues migrated to XLIFF TC list (Yves)
- Interoperability http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201112/msg00034.html 
- Conformance http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201112/msg00031.html
- Representation http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201112/msg00029.html
- Uniqueness http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201112/msg00038.html
- Validation http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201112/msg00039.html


=== 1. XLIFF 2.0 Technical work
a. Approved (http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/XLIFF2.0/FeatureTracking#ApprovedFeaturesforXLIFF2.0)
b. Proposed (http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/XLIFF2.0/FeatureTracking#Featuresunderconsideration.28notyetevaluatedbyTC.29)
c. Discarded (http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/XLIFF2.0/FeatureTracking#DiscardedProposedFeatures)


=== 2. XLIFF 2.0 Technical issues (http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/XLIFF2.0/FeatureTracking#TechnicalIssuesforXLIFF2.0)

=== 3. Conformance criteria
=== 5/ Current XLIFF business


--- 1. XLIFF and TM, Glossary, Segmentation Rules (Christian)

Bryan: should we continue discussion from last meeting?

Rodolfo: proposed before TAUS survey.
But was not accepted.
Now survey says it would be better if XLIFF had all those feature built-in.
Need Christian input (he had feedback on this).
Maybe need to start thread evaluating TAUS survey?

We have so far just match for translation proposal.
So we do have things beyond simple translation constructs.

Joachim: maybe need to re-group those features.
Alt-trans module does not need segmentation rules.

Rodolfo: could have some kind of TM-like element in XLIFF too.

Bryan: no conclusion yet. Maybe let's table this to get input from everyone.

Rodolfo: some people are creating translation package (Linport, IN!, etc.) that may include TM, glossary, etc.

Joachim: TM inside XLIFF does not sound right to me
Rodolfo: +1, we need alt-trans

Joachim: container idea is beyond XLIFF.

--- 2. Gathering common extension points from existing XLIFF Tools as a guide for 2.0 features (Bryan, Thomas)
Note: Bryan will propose moving this to P & L SC (http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201101/msg00007.html)
- Lucia has taken over Micah's matrix
- David F is investigating funding for XLIFF tools page

Bryan: Propose to move this item to P&L SC
No objections.
Will move the item then.

3. Using other standards vs. adding XLIFF modules
 (Arle, David W., Yves, Helena, . . .)

Note: shall we move this to Technical Issues for XLIFF 2.0 wiki page



=== 6/ New Business

Bryan: Any new business?

Note: No P&L SC meeting today.
This was the last meeting of 2011.

Happy holidays and New Year!


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