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" Tuesday Feb-21 2012 - Summary

XLIFF TC Call - Summary
Tuesday Feb-21 2012

=== 1/ Roll call

Present: Bryan, Yves, Ingo, Steven, Shirley, Victor, Arle, DavidW, Fredrik, Tom, Asanka, Kevin, Lucìa, Jung, Joachim, Paul, DavidF, Alan Michael, Christian
Regrets: Rodolfo, Helena, Andrew

New members: Alan Michael, Kevin O'Donnell (both from Microsoft)

=== 2/ Approve Tuesday, 07 February 2012 meeting minutes:

Bryan moves to approve the minutes
Fredrik seconds.
No objections.

Bryan: many features in the work.
Since last meeting, two were proposed to be moved to 'accepted'.
We will address those shortly.

=== 3/ Sub Committee Reports

--- 1. Inline text (Yves)

Minutes are here: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff-inline/201202/msg00007.html
Nothing specific to report to the TC
We also talked about a F2F meeting for SC

--- 2. XLIFF Promotion and Liaison SC Charter (David)
David: First report on State Of The Art tools is done.

Also the minutes of the info-call with Interoperability Now! Has been published.

IN! present XLIFF:doc as an XLIFF profile, but a few aspect of the format make XLIFF:doc not quite XLIFF compliant.
Maybe TC should publish a normative note about what a profile is and is not.
Idea is to start working on such policy.
No-one had objection to start looking at such policy

=== 4/ XLIFF 2.0 (http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/XLIFF2.0/FeatureTracking)
Bryan described the mechanism to approve features for 2.0

DavidF: no "jail term" now, 'discarded' items can go back to proposed by simple ballot.

Bryan: We have two features to possibly move:

Proposed/seconded, sufficient time given for consideration on TC list. Straight to vote (as outlined here http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201202/msg00057.html ):

Translation Candidates http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201202/msg00037.html

Arle and Rodolfo seconded it.
DavidF: need to explain about scope and resources
Yves: I will work on it and think maybe 1 month will be enough.
This would replace alt-trans of 1.2

Ballot: passes.
Christian: I abstain since I am not yet clear about the processing expectations for this feature
Yves will move the item on the wiki.

DavidF: note that we don't necessarily use the old (1.2) names for similar features.

Add optional format attribute for quick at-a-glance reviewhttp://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201202/msg00044.html

Rodolfo seconded this.
Bryan: may need another attribute. In summary: this would allow to use simple HTML to represent the content and structure of the document.
Bryan would drive, would need about one month.
Christian: agree with usefulness, but wonder about the proposed implementation. Not sure of attribute-based is the way. Maybe CSS-based solution could be as viable.
Bryan: Didn't see CSS as explicit enough. Would also be an external resource.
Christian: CSS can probably be internal
Fredrik: that proposal has merit.
Arle: Given the heterogeneity of data being represented in XLIFF, I don't think CSS would be robust enough. I think it's important to allow for a mapping from arbitrary input formats to formatting guidelines. If you use just the XLIFF elements, I doubt that you could get at this. I'd be happy to be proved wrong.
Christian: looking at IN! work I see also preview capability. Maybe HTML in attribute may not be the only solution.
DavidF: those discussions can continue once the feature is 'accepted'
Also agree with Arle.
Christian: that up to debate.
Bryan: this is more like approving a 'concept'. Will go ahead with ballot, vote no or abstain if you have reserve.

Ballot: passes.
Bryan will move the feature.

Christian: http://interoperability-now.googlecode.com/files/XLIFFdoc%20Representation%20Guide_v0.95.pdf
And  http://www.w3.org/Style/styling-XML.en.html

DavidF: we should be ok to do those ballots on Kavi only, it would save time.
Bryan: agree. We just need a process for doing it online: go to ballot if no-one objects before a x number of days.

Arle: I agree with David. That would make for more efficiency. If we stuck to controversial or thorny issues in the phone conversations, I think it would allow us to work faster.

=== 5/ Current XLIFF business

  Note: Moved some items to P & L SC; some remaining things need TC approval to move

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

    - - Suggested we need to start thread evaluating TAUS survey

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

No comments.

=== 6/ New Business 


Next TC meeting is first Tuesday of March.

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