Hi Bryan, Thanks for the background information. Indeed, it sounds like a good topic for the next meeting. If possible, it would be great if we could review details of the substantive changes (and their impact) prior to the call, so we can be better informed. Also, it would be interesting to understand the implications (or risks) of not undertaking a third PR. Thanks, Kevin. From:
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Schnabel, Bryan S Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2013 12:10 PM To: Kevin O'Donnell;
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [xliff] Updated Timeline for progression toward XLIFF 2.0 OASIS Standard - factoring in PR III Hi Kevin, What an excellent question. The short answer is No, I cannot. I made a premature leap here. I’ve had off list conversations regarding the magnitude of some of the comments with some of the posters. Not meant to be non-transparent, but in order to help me understand the issues. In these conversations, on an unofficial level, we agreed that the changes amounted to substantive feature edits. However, OASIS leaves it to the discretion of the TCs to self-police, and to determine if issues are substantive or not, and whether or not they merit a subsequent public review. So it will be up to the TC to make this decision (hopefully in the next TC meeting). If we do not think we need a third PR, then the original timeline holds (more or less)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201309/msg00028.html . If we determine we do need one, the new timeline is meant as a rough calculation of what that might look at on a calendar
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201310/msg00072.html . Sorry that I jumped ahead on this. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Thanks, Bryan From: Kevin O'Donnell [ mailto:
kevinod@microsoft.com ] Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2013 2:37 PM To: Schnabel, Bryan S;
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [xliff] Updated Timeline for progression toward XLIFF 2.0 OASIS Standard - factoring in PR III Hi Bryan, I don't remember email or phone call discussion regarding PR III. Can you please point out the relevant minutes/thread or summarize why we need another review? Thanks, Kevin. From: Schnabel, Bryan S Sent: ?10/?29/?2013 12:07 PM To:
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [xliff] Updated Timeline for progression toward XLIFF 2.0 OASIS Standard - factoring in PR III Hello, Here’s the new calculation based on our projected need to have a third PR. Note if you want to compare, this is what we calculated when we thought PR II would be enough (
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201309/msg00028.html ). 1. Reconciled each PR2 comment: [19 Nov] 2. Statements of Use [identify by 05 Nov] A. Must have a statement of use for each core feature B. Should have a statement of use for each module feature B. Test Suite (1 application vs. ecosystem of tools) i. Reference Implementation (one implementation that touches each feature): nice to have; not must have [identify by 05 Nov; roll out by 04 Dec] ii. Ecosystem of tools [identify list by 05 Nov; roll out by 08 Jan] 3. Re-approved Committee Draft (that reflects resolved comments,
https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/tc-process#committeeDraft ) [19 Nov] 4. Third Public Review, 15-day [03 Dec - 18 Dec] 5. Approve Committee Specification (
https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/tc-process#committeeSpec ) [14 Jan] 6. Approve OASIS Standard (
https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/tc-process#OASISstandard ) [14 Jan - 09 Apr] A. Submit Candidate Specification [14 Jan] B. Public Review of Candidate Specification (60 days) [21 Jan - 24 Mar] C. Ballot for OASIS Specification approval [26 Mar - 09 Apr]