RE: [xliff] XLIFF TC call - 17 April 2012 - Summary

["Tom Comerford" <tom@supratext.com>]

Yves,

There are some comments wrongly attributed to me in the minutes. Not that I disagree at all; but the credit for those insights belongs to someone else. Here's the relevant segment:

    Tom: Custom namespace in source/target may affect
        leveraging. Maybe need custom values to allow
        better validation.
    Fredrik: if you allow custom namespace there is little
        value to metaHolder.
    Tom: need to keep content as clean as possibility
    Fredrik: custom data should not be expected to be
        processed by other tools.

Regards,

Tom


-----Original Message-----
From: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:xliff@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Yves Savourel
Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2012 12:06 PM
To: xliff@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [xliff] XLIFF TC call - 17 April 2012 - Summary

XLIFF TC Call
Date: Tuesday, 17 April 2012, 11:00am - 12:00pm ET


=== 1/ Roll call

Presents: Yves, Victor, Rodolfo, Ingo, Arle, Bryan, Lucìa, Shirley, DavidF, Joachim, DavidW, Helena, Kevin, Fredrik, Tom, Asanka, Jung, Alan, Christian, Leave of absence: Andrew


=== 2/ Administrative

--- 1. Approve Tuesday, 03 April 2012 meeting minutes:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201204/msg00014.html

Bryan moves to accept the minutes
Rodolfo seconds
No objections
 

--- 2. Proposed and seconded Liaison with Multilingual Web-LT
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201204/msg00013.html

Bryan: Had time to look / think about it. Shall we vote?
DavidF: Text of the ballot is here: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201204/msg00013.html
Second ballot (at the same time): Nominee is Arle.

Rodolfo: note that P&L SC expires in July, so such liaison will have to be reporting differently.
DavidF: if SC not prolonged then we'll need the liaison to report directly to TC.

Results: for the creation of the liaison: passes
For Arle as the liaison: passes



=== 3/ XLIFF 2.0 (http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/XLIFF2.0/FeatureTracking

--- 1. Features proposed and seconded between meetings via mailing list, and features mentioned

Bryan: still need to produce video for editing wiki.

a. Proposed and seconded: (B25) Preserve metadata without using extensibility" (http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/XLIFF2.0/FeatureTracking#XLIFF2.0.2BAC8-Feature.2BAC8-PreserveXMLattributeormetadatawithoutextensibility.A.28B25.29Preservemetadatawithoutusingextensibility

- Extensibility sub thread (http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201203/msg00077.html
- Implementing extensions sub thread (http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201203/msg00078.html

Rodolfo: some consensus for extensibility points. (custom namespaces)
So where would they be allowed?
Fredrik: in favor of NOT using custom extension and use Rodolfo/Bryan proposal
Bryan: heard only from 3/4 of us only
Ingo: was on holiday, couldn't catch up. Currently we use custom namespace.
If 2.0 is not backward compatibility then go with meta
Yves, Christian: for custom namespaces
Ingo: for allowing in source/target
Fredrik: Real problem is the use of it. Custom namespaces encourage having info all over the place.
Makes it difficult to handle such files.
Bryan: metaHolder doesn't necessarily exclude custom namespaces, currently.
Could have both, for example in skeleton.
Rodolfo: skeleton allow any namespace
Bryan: Given that I would be willing to part with custom namespaces.
Fredrik: it's about what is reasonable to implement. The issue is with what you do, e.g. has values requiring updates.
The problem is the same regardless of metaHolder or custom namespace.
metaHolder makes it more cumbersome to do this.

Tom: Custom namespace in source/target may affect leveraging. Maybe need custom values to allow better validation.
Fredrik: if you allow custom namespace there is little value to metaHolder.
Tom: need to keep content as clean as possibility
Fredrik: custom data should not be expected to be processed by other tools.
Yves: I agree
Rodolfo: way to solve this, is to make any extension deletable
Ingo: do we have a list where they would be allowed?
Rodolfo: no header yet
Ingo: header is where we store extension
Rodolfo: if go with custom namespace I would allow them anywhere but in source/target and inline codes.
Christian: anyone implement XLIFF without XML parser?
Rodolfo: I do use a parser, but some do not. Example non-valid characters
Fredrik: or attributes in different order
Yves: problem with tool not xliff
Fredrik: can we have processing expectation for extension?
Bryan: too many processing expectation are detrimental to interoperability
Rodolfo: if safe to ignore, then 3rd party tool should be ok to not have them back.
Fredrik: could have also custom elements in XLIFF making XLIFF without them invalid
DavidF: discussion valuable, drifted about Proc expt. Need new thread maybe
Rodolfo: suggest electronic ballot with 2 weeks
- if we want extension model and which one
- with email discussion
DavidF: there are many options here, things need to be considered with the 3 levels
Bryan: yes/no/abstain + comments allow to change and see reasons
Rodolfo: just asking for choosing a model, not define it completely



=== 4/ Sub Committee Reports

--- 1. Inline text (Yves)

Minutes are here: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff-inline/201204/msg00004.html

- F2F in Jun-14/15 http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/OneContentModel/June2012FaceToFace

- discussed how to represent XLIFF-supported info that are coded in original file. For example how to represent HTML5 translate attribute: as a code or as an annotation? Answer: both.

- looking at directionality markup

- discussed validation tools vs schema, agree the topic was for the TC.



--- 2. XLIFF Promotion and Liaison SC Charter (David)

David: No progress for XLIFF symposium.
Please tell David if you want to be in the scientific committee

a. David formally proposes to create a formal liaison with MultilingualWeb-LT and nominate Arle Lommel to serve as the first XLIFF TC liaison on MultilingualWeb-LT (http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201203/msg00091.html )

David: thanks for the voting the appointee.


b. XLIFF support in CAT tools Survey (http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201204/msg00001.html )

Lucìa: survey stop Apr-28, no additional answers so far.
8 tools have answered, but 2/3 didn't really answered
DavidF: need to resend call. Not enough answers



=== 6/ New Business

Bryan: any new business?

- meeting adjourned



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: xliff-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: xliff-help@lists.oasis-open.org