Event Title: XLIFF TC Meeting
Date: Tuesday, 16 September 2014, 11:00am to 12:00pm EDT
Please get the dial in information from our private Action Item here:
This meeting counts towards voter eligibility.
I Administration (0:00 - 0:10)
A. Roll call
B. Approved (by clearing CFD) meeting minutes, 09 September 2014
C. XLIFF 2.0 as an ISO standard
(* indicates new since last meeting)
D Approve Media Type Registratio Template n http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/xliff/ballot.php?id=2672
II XLIFF 2.1 (0:10 - 0:45)
A. New XLIFF 2.1 Tracker page - Bryan
B. Medial type registration template - David
1. * Propose ITS 2.0 feature in XLIFF 2.1 https://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/XLIFF2.0/Feature/ITS%20Mapping#preview - David
III Sub Committee Report (0:50 - 0:55)
IV Current and New Business (0:55 - )
- Chet joined;
- had some issues with Goto meeting;
- Regrets from: Helena, Felix
- Present: Asanka, dF, Chet, Fredrik, Yves, Peter, Joachim, Uwe, Soroush, Tom, Michael Ow, Bryan; 9/12 voters [Chet as guest].
- Is Jamie joining us?
- Not sure;
- He said he might be able to dial in from airport, not sure whether we should wait from him?
- I have notes with me; if Jamie is not available, I can cover;
- We had some technical glitches with dial in; thank you Chet for joining.
- We have a honoured guest Chet Ensign, OASIS Admin. We are going to quickly move through the admin items and get to item 1.c, which would be the item that Chet is here to talk about.
- Moving on to agenda item 1.B; We have approved Sept 9th meeting minutes though a call for dissent; meeting minutes were seconded by Tom.
- First substantive item: we have a proposal from P&L SC headed by dF and Peter to submit our newly approved XLIFF 2.0 standards over to ISO, we've invited Chet and Jamie to join us today; Chet has got important info related to this discussion.
- Thanks for inviting both Jamie and me to come and talk about this ...; Jamie is in transit from Europe; not sure whether he will be able to join us or not; I'll quickly walk you through this;
- On the "OASIS home page" under the "policies & guidelines" you will find in the full list of policies the OASIS liaison policy document. That's where all of the steps for making the submission of a approved OASIS standard into ISO standard are covered. I will take you through the steps here..
- TCs can request changes to meet the needs of specific circumstances; usually no problem with doing that; but because we are talking about submission to ISO submissions, we have most of the relevant stuff teplated.
- In a nutshell, here is what you need to do:
- First thing that you need to do is that you need to work with Jamie and me to draft a submission request; this is the formal request that will go to the OASIS president asking that he make the submission to the international standard body and providing background information on it ... the submission document will goes over to the org. that's being submitted to itself. The required elements of that submission request are in the liaison policy. I am pretty sure Jamie has a template and again because it is going to the ISO, things such as benefits ... OASIS from the submission are pretty much already written and you can add a few tweaks but most of the document is ready ... In fact most of the time Jamie will write a first draft and send it to you to say how this sounds to you. Work with us to get the submission request get done; and in general it is pretty good idea that you all get on board with that submission request and obtain internal approval in a TC meeting before you proceed into next steps.
- Once you got that submission request done, you approve a motion to request a special majority vote to approve making the submission to the president of OASIS; I will run that special majority vote for you, .. it has to stay open for 7 days. And at the end of the special majority vote ... passes then Jamie and I will forward the submission on behalf of the TC to the OASIS Board Chair and to our Executive director. The reason we submit to both of them is because at Oasis President does not actually match any existing job title, so our interpretation is that it means the two leadership positions.
- Process is straightforward as this is an existing TC and an existing standard.
- Once we send the submissions to the board, the board president has 15 days to confirm that it is a complete and proper request and .. sending that to membership to review
- Typically we send this off to the board chair [....] and they reply say this looks good send it out.. Typically this does not take 15 days.
- We then take this submission request and host it through the OASIS membership for 30 day comment period, this like the any other review processes, it just goes out to the OASIS memberships; The TC wants to make this submission; this is the submission form, this is where you send your comments etc.
- Normally you don't get any comments back, if you do receive any comments then you handle them like any other public review ....; then you decide whether you want to update content/submission or not. ... make tweaks to the submission and we send on your behalf to the chair [...] with the results of the 30 days public review.
- At that point the OASIS president has 15 days to either approve sending this submission on or reject it. Then typically they'll notify us and we'll notify TC and the membership, that we got the submission request and we will take it from there
- Then after they sent out the approval, no earlier than 15 days, no later than 45 days, they send the submission request to the receiving org. (i.e. ISO). Jamie takes care of that
- I know that you've identified the TC that you recommend to handle the submission, but I am not sure Jamie will send it to his contact within ISO or straight to the working group. In any case, Jamie handles this. Then we basically sit back and wait.
- Just a couple of notices on the waiting period, it can take a while for the receiving org. to act on the submission. We/basically Jamie handles questions back and forth .. there can be confidential behind the scenes taking place to clear up misunderstandings etc. and that will get handled very quietly and very professionally.
- All we ask from TC is to contact Jamie with questions and not to make any announcements and to coordinate with Jamie on any issues, just to make sure that we don't accidentally step on some toes ... Be patient; Wait for ISO to make the formal announcement;
- That's pretty much it; once they've approved it, then they take over the publication side from their end; it is pretty much done from yours;
- Any questions?
- Would it be possible for me to talk a little bit about the ISO part of this?
- Firstly, a couple of years back we identified the TC 37, which deals with all the language issues etc, as the relevant TC for ISO, if we ever publish XLIFF 2.0 as the international standard and at that stage we became a liaison member of this TC .. two representatives of the TC and the OASIS, myself and Jamie. Jamie was very involved from beginning. Within ISO, standards have to be associated with a TC, even when it is joint committee ... there has to be people there to work on it. And also, one of the interesting things of standard development is that publsihing an ISO standard is much faster than OASIS for example. They insists that standards happening faster because they've seen momentum loss in various cases.
- Standard process is usually a six stage process: proposal happens, subject matter experts look at it, then get looked up by national bodies, then comes to an enquiry stage where it is a draft international standard that's been evaluated for publication; In the past there has been a proofing stage .. and the final stage is obviously publication.
- What happens in our case is that we can argue that we've already done the work on development of XLIFF, in that case we have 3 stages: proposal stage, enquiry stage and publication stage; in terms of the time scale for this, the proposal stage would take a couple of months essentially as there is a vote from the relevant committee saying that they agreed with moving forward on this, then it goes to the draft international standards stage and there is a month's period before anything happens where ISO translates the document in to French. and the next stage can be between 2-6 months, that is usually dependent on what sort of agreements there are with it..if it is the case that ISO will work with other organisations such as one of the European standards bodies, then the stage can be five months, but usually it can be 2-3 months at this stage. Following that depending on what happens that stage .. the document will be ready for publication or you may have to look at the comments that come back. Following that ISO will publish the standard in English and French and one of the big gains from our perspective is that many orgs are mandated to use ISO standards, .. so in short that's the process..
- in an event that some comments are collected, how would that be propagated back to the XLIFF TC ...?
- one of the elements of the submissions is how maintenance will be handled and who will be responsible for it; In case of OASIS submissions it states that XLIFF TC will continue to maintain the standard ... comments on the standard/ requests for changes.. they'll be fed back to the OASIS TC. The submission request will specify OASIS TC will continue to maintain the standard.
- sounds good. meaning that substantive comments will get fixed by OASIS TC and then we resubmitted to ISO
- thank you
- Pretty clear; we will learn as we go. The time-frame needs to be managed;
- Now we have a very good understanding of the process. I suggest that this is pushed back to the SC. I proposed Peter as the owner of this until the subcommittee. I don't want to spend substantial time talking on this matter in the main TC.
- Make sense to me;
- We can go by dissent. Is there any dissent to let Peter and SC work with Jamie to prepare the submission?
- I second.
- I hear no dissent, I assume SC has mandate to work on it.
- Proposed by dF seconded by Uwe.
- Any question to Chet or Peter ?
- Usually the ISO is quite open org, anyone who wants to get involved can do this through their national standards body; it is quite easy to get involved in the TC that will handle this.
- good point; if anyone want to see the ISO part of it they are invited to attend through their national standards body
- We will continue to track this within SC. Let's conclude the agenda item 1.c. Thank you Peter and Chet. Moving to agenda 1.d.
- We have a ballot under way; URL posted; 6 yes votes; needs 8 to approve our media type registration template as Committee Specification. Any questions on media type registration?
- We'll close the admin portion of the meeting and begin with the substantive XLIFF 2.1 discussions. Moving to new items that have been collected between last two meetings and also unresolved items. we have item 2.c.1. Proposed ITS feature; dF formally proposed ITS feature in xliff 2.1
- Bryan mentioned I put the feature on the feature tracker; tried to add advanced validation support, created the page, but page does not appear on the overview don't know what I have done wrong.
- link for ITS support
- link for advance validation support;
- You actually have to edit the tracker page and add the link
- I see, I will fix it;
- I'd like to know if the TC thinks it is generally a good idea to have or not to have the ITS feature in the next release? we are not expected to discuss technical details of the solutions right now;
- I nominate myself as the owner of the feature (from the project management perspective)
- People who committed to work on this: Yves, dF, Fredrik, Felix Sasaki - we have demonstrated reasonable momentum for this feature.
- Link to ITS interest group that has been working on the mapping so far:
- If this feature is approved, I will start transferring the categories that are more or less developed into the format of the OASIS spec. We will be tracking the progress of the feature.
- By November, we should have technically developed the spec. And also reference implementations (there are already reference implementations that work with ITS as extension, which is BTW a good idea for any future features, should prove themselves as extensions first..).
- I will propose an electronic ballot (simple majority with yes, no, abstain options; the option with most votes wins, abstains have no effect)
- Any questions?
- We should expect this to show in the mailing list;
- Only B can set up electronic ballots;
- I will propose to create the electronic ballot in the mailing list
- Provides a nice paper trail anyway.
- I'd like to cover the Advanced Validation support as well that B was able to add to the tracker in the meantime;
- This was covered in Dublin during 5th Symposium - Felix's presentation.
[Felix Sasaki presented an example XLIFF 2.0 document and used various validation techniques to check selected constraints that are not captured by the XLIFF 2.0 schema. Relevant techniques are Schematron, RELAX NG and NVDL. The discussion after the demo was about how to move forward with validation.
Felix proposed to create a Schematron schema to capture the XLIFF 2.0 constraints. There was a discussion about the role of NVDL for capturing extensibility constraints, and Felix will move forward with creating an NVDL schema for that purpose.]
- Presentation highlighted which advanced validation techniques can be used to address validation issues related to XLIFF 2.0
- We've a number of experts: Felix, Jirka (as a persistent non-voter who agreed to help with potential issues as these arise) and Soroush (working on a PhD thesis on this topic)
- Yves provides a validation service, but we need need standardised TC sanctioned machine readable artifacts, xsd simply no longer cuts it..
- I will propose an electronic ballot on the TC list and wait for a second.
- Thank you. Moving ahead to item 4.
- Any new business for agenda for next meeting?
- Moving to agenda item 3. Inviting dF to give SC update
- P&L SC will prepare the SC submission as agreed today. We will take it back to TC once ready for discussion/approval;
- Vancouver Symposium preparation in progress
- Speakers: Yves, John Watkins, Soroush, Alan... reporting on TBX <-> XLIFF interoperability
- Encourage to register for the pre-conference (for free)
- Spread the word:
- We have approved the SOU report in the last meeting
- Any questions?
- Thank you. Meeting adjourned
Owner: Bryan Schnabel
Group: OASIS XML Localisation Interchange File Format (XLIFF) TC
Sharing: This event is shared with the OASIS Open (General Membership), and General Public groups.
Public Event Link
Microsoft Outlook users: You will see event notifications requiring further
action in your Outlook mail application.
Non-Outlook users: We still recommend subscribing to a Group or organization-wide
calendar to keep your calendar updated.
- Learn more about subscribing here.
- View the updated Group web calendar here.