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: status of the spec

Hi all,

as you have probably noticed we have not managed to send the spec to the second public review by August 6 as planned. The Xmas 2013 deadline could eventually still be made if we progressed in the meeting on August 20

So we are now making an effort to do that in the TC meeting on August 20.

Please come to the meeting unless you are on LoA. We will need at least 7 voters to move forward.
Please let me know if you cannot make it so that we eventually prepare a plan B, Probably an electronic ballot.

I have completed major changes last weekend.
I am still checking normative language of the spec based on an automated report, so the sanity of the spec will be improving throughout this week.
Tom has scripts for formatting normative language in a batch after all manual fixes are performed
Tom will also bring schemas, trees, schema listings, and the major core example up to date before the meeting.
Bryan will make sure that all commenters external to the TC will receive e-mails informing them on the resolutions of their comments.

However, there are still a few blocking issues that prevent us from sending the spec for public review on August 20 if not resolved on the mailing by then or in the meeting at the very latest.

1) We need Fredrik or Yves to write resegmentation PRs and socialize them with the group, so that we can implement them into the spec. The groundwork has been done by moving most of the metadata away from segment.
@Jung, or anyone else, do you want to have a go here, before Fredrik and Yves return from holidays?

2) We need Fredrik to resolve the issue 031 and get group consensus for it. is not a big deal, Fredrik just needs to consider a few suggestions made by Chase. the resolution should be more like an FYI and sanity check

3) We need to resolve the dissent around the approved and state attributes. The solution I implemented that received the support of the non-quorum meeting on August 6 was extensively discussed between Yves, Ryan, and me. We'd like to see more people to express their opinion on this, in order to see if we van reach consensus or prepare options for a ballot that would need to take place before sending the spec into the public review, i.e. in the same meeting.

Best regards

Dr. David Filip
University of Limerick, Ireland
telephone: +353-6120-2781
cellphone: +353-86-0222-158
facsimile: +353-6120-2734
mailto: david.filip@ul.ie

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