Joachim, nothing against keeping things simple. But this module is TOO simple it has no space for metadata at all. It even does not have ID, so that you cannot even refer to it marking terminology inline with markers.. If you think of a future terminology module, it would need to replace this simplistic module unless it is made more fit for purpose. If you at least allowed extensibility on glossary, people COULD experiment with mappings, and maybe a TBX profile/module could arise from that experimentation. We should encourage extensibility at points where we see potential for further development, and this way the module would develop organically. And BTW it still does not have PRs.. I am going to start a separate thread with process and agent terminology to facilitate PR writing for features and modules. Cheers 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 On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 9:01 PM, Ryan King <
ryanki@microsoft.com > wrote: Thanks Joachim and Rodolfo. We will respect the prior decision to keep the glossary module simple. A larger TBD Terminology module in 2.1 will be more interesting to us in that case. Thanks, Ryan From: Schurig, Joachim [mailto:
Joachim.Schurig@lionbridge.com ] Sent: Monday, December 3, 2012 8:59 AM To: Ryan King;
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [xliff] RE: XLIFF 2.0 spec - dF Issue #03 - No PRs in glossary module Hi Ryan, the owner really is Rodolfo. I do not know why I am listed. However, I share his thinking about keeping the Glossaries module really small and simple, and leaving it for a larger TBD terminology module to create a more sophisticated storage. In my opinion, allowing proprietary metadata on this simple module defeats its purpose, and tends to give us the anything-goes attitude of v1.2 back. Why not creating a (maybe TBX-inspired) full-featured Terminology module instead, which leaves no room for (mis-)interpretation of the respective values? I would seriously embrace that solution (and I understand the need for more sophisticated attributes for certain types of projects). Best regards, Joachim From:
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org [ mailto:
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org ] On Behalf Of Ryan King Sent: Samstag, 1. Dezember 2012 01:06 To:
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org ; Schurig, Joachim Subject: RE: [xliff] RE: XLIFF 2.0 spec - dF Issue #03 - No PRs in glossary module Hi Joachim, since you are listed as owner on the wiki for the Glossaries module, is adding metadata to the module something you are willing to put to ballot? Thanks, ryan From:
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org [ mailto:
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org ] On Behalf Of Ryan King Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 4:17 PM To: Rodolfo M. Raya;
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [xliff] RE: XLIFF 2.0 spec - dF Issue #03 - No PRs in glossary module In this case, I think we should consider approving a new ballot, otherwise, there will be no other way to carry this information unless we want to state that non-BASIC glossary information can be put it in a metadata module outside of glossary. ryan From:
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org [ mailto:
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org ] On Behalf Of Rodolfo M. Raya Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 3:22 PM To:
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [xliff] RE: XLIFF 2.0 spec - dF Issue #03 - No PRs in glossary module When the ballot for approving the glossary module was done, it passed because we agreed on NOT adding terminological information. The module is supposed to contain only BASIC glossary data. If you add metadata, then you are changing the nature of what was agreed and approved and a new ballot must be done. Regards, Rodolfo -- Rodolfo M. Raya
rmraya@maxprograms.com Maxprograms
http://www.maxprograms.com From:
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org [ mailto:
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org ] On Behalf Of Ryan King Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 8:31 PM To: Dr. David Filip;
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [xliff] RE: XLIFF 2.0 spec - dF Issue #03 - No PRs in glossary module Thanks David, we (Microsoft) definitely advocate the need to have metadata on the glossary module since this is the only way we will be able to carry around rich terminology that goes beyond simple Term Translation Definition, such as part-of-speech, usage notes, product version a term is used in, etc. Thanks, Ryan From: Dr. David Filip [ mailto:
David.Filip@ul.ie ] Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 5:09 PM To: Ryan King;
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Fwd: XLIFF 2.0 spec - dF Issue #03 - No PRs in glossary module Ryan, re your note on the metadata module. I pointed out earlier today as an issue that the glossary module is not capable of carrying metadata.. See below.. Cheers 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: Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 1:39 PM Subject: XLIFF 2.0 spec - dF Issue #03 - No PRs in glossary module To:
xliff@lists.oasis-open.org Dear owner, all. [P.S.: Since all *.org links stopped working on my machine due to some strange DNS error, I cannot lookup the owner on our wiki :-(] [I vaguely recollect that the owner might be Rodolfo (?)] If there are no PRs, no one will be ever able to delete the module data. This is just the gravest consequence. Other than that, PRs (and definitions as needed) should be provided that could support a 'naive implementer', i.e. someone without the L10n tribal knowledge. Other issues with this module: [Please start a separate thread if you want to discuss this issue..] 03.01) This module is unable to carry any metadata (except the mandatory source attribute on <defintion> which does not seem sufficient), I guess that provenance attributes should be specified at all levels or at least top two levels. Alternatively, the module could get extensible at the same levels (all three or two respectively) Cheers 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