RE: [xliff] Note from the wiki gardener

["Schnabel, Bryan S" <bryan.s.schnabel@tektronix.com>]

Hi Rodolfo,

 

Thanks for the very good feedback. I can see how “ready-to-vote” would be a handy status to add. But to keep this from getting too complicated, I kind of like the stark simplicity of just three states. We could consider any approved feature, that is not yet locked into the 2.0 spec by TC approval to still be “in-development” because it could still be sent back to the owner as needing more work. I think a downside of adding a “ready-for-vote” state into the workflow is that it could (technically) also be needed/used to indicate a Proposed (2.x) feature is ‘fully-baked’ and ready to be voted on to be promoted to Approved (1.x).

 

I see the starkly simple lifecycle flow as this:

 

Proposed feature (state=”under-eval) vote =”y” à Approved feature (state=”in-dvp”) vote=”y” à state=”final”

       Or

Proposed feature (state=”under-eval) vote =”y” à Approved feature (state=”in-dvp”) vote=”n” à state=”in-dvp”

       Or

Proposed feature (state=”under-eval) vote =”n” à Discarded feature

 

 

That said, I’m not married to the starkly simple lifecycle (yet). TC members, please weigh in if you have opinions on the needed “state” values.

 

Thanks,

 

Bryan

 

 

From: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:xliff@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Rodolfo M. Raya
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2012 10:31 AM
To: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [xliff] Note from the wiki gardener

 

Hi Bryan,

 

Feature (R33) “Glossaries” has been completed and is waiting for the TC’s approval. “In- development” does not convey the right information in this case, another category like “ready-to-vote” would come handy.

 

Feature (C31) “Allow XML content in <internal-file> element”. Has also been implemented in the DTD by allowing elements from any namespace in <skeleton> and this has been noted in the specification document. Notice that in current XML Schema we don’t have an <internal-file> element. The TC also has to approve this change.

 

Regards,

Rodolfo

--
Rodolfo M. Raya       rmraya@maxprograms.com
Maxprograms       http://www.maxprograms.com

 

From: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:xliff@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Schnabel, Bryan S
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2012 2:07 PM
To: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [xliff] Note from the wiki gardener

 

Hello,

 

I’ve normalized the “state” values to better indicate the status of each feature in the XLIFF 2.0 Feature Tracking wiki page (http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/XLIFF2.0/FeatureTracking ).

 

We now have three available state values:

 

Newly proposed feature = "under-evaluation"

Approved feature = "in-development"

Wording for XLIFF 2.0 Specification approved by TC = "final"

 

I updated each feature to reflect its correct state. I think we will need to document a policy on criteria for reaching “final” state.

 

Thanks,

 

Bryan