[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [xliff-comment] RE: [xliff] Re: [xliff-comment] Comment on XLIFF 2.0 30 day draft
Next, Bryan, your questions..."Do any of these count?" - Yes, they all count however only as one Statement of Use. You will be the party submitting the Statement of Use and you'll spell out that you have created multiple independent implementations, indicate whether or not they interoperate and spell out the clauses that they implement. Again, it is up to the TC to decide whether or not to accept the SoU, but the applications you describe sound fine to me."Also, I might be able to get an OASIS voting member company or two to kick the tires. Does that count as an OASIS member?" Certainly does, depending on what you mean by 'kick the tires.' If they build an implementation they can supply a SoU. If they just test out your code in practice, no, that won't count as an OASIS member nor as an SoU. They actually have to create an implementation to submit an SoU.CAROL -> this last part is for you: "ps. planting a seed; has OASIS ever thought of translating their Drupal site? I know of a great XLIFF module, and some great translators that have good experience using it." I'm copying Carol Geyer as she owns our communications. I know that we have a Japanese and a Chinese site - they are listed at the bottom of the main OASIS home page. I don't know how they were done though. Carol may want to follow up.Best,
/chet
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Schnabel, Bryan S <bryan.s.schnabel@tektronix.com> wrote:
Hi Chet, David, Yves,
Chet, I wonder if I could get a ruling . . .
I am currently creating versions of my open source XLIFF applications to work with XLIFF 2.0:
xliffRoundTrip Tool http://sourceforge.net/projects/xliffroundtrip/
DITA-XLIFF Roundtrip Plugin for OT http://sourceforge.net/projects/ditaxliff/files/
Drupal XLIFF module https://drupal.org/project/xliff (caveat, I am a contributing developer, not owner of the module, but am active in doing the update)
Each of the above, as Yves characterized, will touch some, but not all modules.
In addition, I'm working on a light-weight editor that (with luck, will indeed exercise all the modules).
Do any of these count?
Also, I might be able to get an OASIS voting member company or two to kick the tires. Does that count as an OASIS member?
Thanks,
Bryan
ps. planting a seed; has OASIS ever thought of translating their Drupal site? I know of a great XLIFF module, and some great translators that have good experience using it.
________________________________
From: Yves Savourel [yves@opentag.com]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 6:39 AM
To: xliff-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [xliff-comment] RE: [xliff] Re: [xliff-comment] Comment on XLIFF 2.0 30 day draft
Hi David,
> OASIS does have requirement of 2 (2 OASIS members) or 3 (1 OASIS member + 2 external)
> before you move to OASIS standard, we are however moving towards Committee Specification.
> Implementations for the OASIS standard move will be of course discussed
> on the F2F on June 10.
I’m glad to discover there is a requirement for implementations. From past discussions in the TC I thought there were none.
I assume this requirement is the one mentioned in the first paragraph of https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/tc-process#OASISstandard. It seems to be 3 Statements of Use, at least one of them from a TC member.
A statement of use is defined in the same page and says among other things:
[[
"Statement of Use", with respect to a Committee Specification, is a written statement that a party has successfully used or implemented that specification in accordance with all or some of its conformance clauses specified in Section 2.18, identifying those clauses that apply, and stating whether its use included the interoperation of multiple independent implementations. The Statement of Use must be made to a specific version of the Committee Specification
...
]]
This emphasis Chase’s comment. We still need to have implementations as soon as possible. Before the specification becomes a Committee Specification since we can’t change/fix anything after that.
The other comment I have (probably for an OASIS officer) is about the extent of the implementations: The text above seems to indicate that a given implementation can implement only some of the conformance clauses. My worry is that we may end up with 3 implementations doing the bare minimum and none implementing large parts of the specification (the modules for example).
That would not bode well for XLIFF 2.0 to move to OASIS Standard.
-ys
--
/chet
----------------
Chet Ensign
Director of Standards Development and TC Administration
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society
http://www.oasis-open.org
Primary: +1 973-996-2298
Mobile: +1 201-341-1393Check your work using the Support Request Submission Checklist at http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/47248/tc-admin-submission-checklist.html
TC Administration information and support is available at http://www.oasis-open.org/resources/tcadmin
Follow OASIS on:
LinkedIn: http://linkd.in/OASISopen
Twitter: http://twitter.com/OASISopen
Facebook: http://facebook.com/oasis.open
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]