Bringing the spec into a state fit for the First Public Review was Fwd: [xliff] Call for notification of dissent: all members please reply

["Dr. David Filip" <David.Filip@ul.ie>]

Hi all,

you might have noticed that we are trying to push the spec to the first public review in the meeting next Tue.

@Editors, @Feature owners, please commit any changes that you deem NECESSARY to be performed BEFORE the first public review by today End of Your Day.

This is to give @Tom a chance to make any schema changes before the meeting.

Please note that schema is one of the most important normative parts of the spec and SHOULD be in sync with the documentation for the first public review (I am not using MUST, because minor sync issues are quite likely in the first round).

If the changes are too big for Tom to implement by the next meeting, we will most likely miss the opportunity to push the spec for review in a timely manner and in good sync with the 4th XLIFF Symposium.

@All members, if you find any issues that in your view prevent the spec to enter the first public review next week, please ask me to fix them. Give me exact wording/solution for the fix, again during today.

TC members are expected to comment on the draft along with the public during public reviews.

I myself have several improvement ideas that could however not be implemented by Tuesday.  Hence, I plan to raise them within the public review cycles.

If you have such an idea please do not forget it and raise it as soon as the first public review is officially announced.

In case you think that there is at this stage an issue that cannot be effectively addressed at a later stage, and that this issue MUST be removed before the first public review, please respond ASAP to Bryan's call for dissent using one of the options (2)-(4).

It would be also nice to get positive "straws" in the form of (1) or (5) (introduced later by Yves, and makes sense IMHO).

Best regards and have a nice weekend

dF

Dr. David Filip

=======================

LRC | CNGL | LT-Web | CSIS

University of Limerick, Ireland

telephone: +353-6120-2781

cellphone: +353-86-0222-158

facsimile: +353-6120-2734

mailto: david.filip@ul.ie

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Dr. David Filip <David.Filip@ul.ie>
Date: Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 12:53 PM
Subject: Re: [xliff] Call for notification of dissent: all members please reply
To: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>
Cc: "xliff@lists.oasis-open.org" <xliff@lists.oasis-open.org>

Thanks Yves, this is the option I was looking for :-)

[5] I have no objection to publish a Committee Specification Draft.

Dr. David Filip

=======================

LRC | CNGL | LT-Web | CSIS

University of Limerick, Ireland

telephone: +353-6120-2781

cellphone: +353-86-0222-158

facsimile: +353-6120-2734

mailto: david.filip@ul.ie

On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com> wrote:

> (1) I have no objections with the core; I have no objections with the modules
> (2) I have no objections with the core; I object to the X module because [insert reason here]
> (3) I have no objections with the modules; I object to the Z feature in the core because [insert reason here]
> (4) I object to the Z feature in the core because [insert reason here]; I object to the X module because [insert reason here]

[5] I have no objection to publish a Committee Specification Draft.

cheers,
-ys

From:        "Schnabel, Bryan S" <bryan.s.schnabel@tektronix.com>
To:        "xliff@lists.oasis-open.org" <xliff@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date:        04/02/2013 05:02 PM
Subject:        [xliff] Call for notification of dissent: all members please reply
Sent by:        <xliff@lists.oasis-open.org>

________________________________________

Hi all,

As we approach the completion of XLIFF 2.0 it is very important that we manage the ballots and approvals in the best way possible.

To get to where we are today we’ve had a very, very robust dialog. We’ve had energetic, passionate, sometimes contentious, but always transparent discussions and debates.

It is my belief that everyone had a voice, and ample opportunity to express their concerns. As a result, I believe we have a specification that has been thoroughly vetted, and reflects consensus.

Among the standards owned by OASIS - XLIFF is somewhat non-mainstream. Therefore it will greatly help us to get the votes we need among OASIS voting members if we bring our standard to them with unanimous TC approval.

Toward that end, I ask that each of you please take the time now to voice any concern you have about the core or modules that would prevent you from casting a “yes” vote for specification and schema approval.

I would expect that we’ve all had time to form an opinion on core. As for modules, I think we’ve all had ample opportunity to either get involved, or not get involved. If you do not have an opinion on a module, I would ask that you do not hold your “yes” vote hostage to your lack of an opinion on that module. I would ask that, as we do with subcommittees we do not participate in, trust that those who *did* have inputs did so competently.

So now, I ask that every member please respond to this email with the reply that fits your opinion:

(1)    I have no objections with the core; I have no objections with the modules
(2)    I have no objections with the core; I object to the X module because [insert reason here]
(3)    I have no objections with the modules; I object to the Z feature in the core because [insert reason here]
(4)    I object to the Z feature in the core because [insert reason here]; I object to the X module because [insert reason here]

Please take the time to reply to the this before the next TC meeting. Please also refrain from contesting an answer. The goal at this stage is to simply log the results. If there are any non-(1) replies, let’s wait until the next meeting to address them.

This is of course non-binding.

Thanks in advance for participating in this thread.

- Bryan

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php