Description:
See the private action item for dial in details
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/xliff-omos/members/action_item.php?action_item_id=3822
==========
Agenda:
A. Admin
1- Roll call
total 7 voters
2- Minutes from Jan 10 https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/xliff-omos/email/archives/201701/msg00002.html
B. Material
1- XLIFF OM
OASIS GitHub Repository URL: https://github.com/oasis-tcs/xliff-omos-om
Primary Maintainer: David Filip
Backup Maintainer: Felix Sasaki
https://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff-omos/WorkingWithPapyrus
dF made some goo dprogress on the diagram.. let's check it out
2- JLIFF
Repository URL;: https://github.com/oasis-tcs/xliff-omos-jliff
Primary Maintainer: Robert van Engelen
Backup Maintainer: Chase Tingley
- Chase added by Robin to make wiki editting possible
- Need to discuss strategy for modules and extensions
- Want to change expansion of JLIFF based on last time discussion .. should be a Fragment Format, rather than a file format..
3- TBX Mapping
Continue work on SVN: https://tools.oasis-open.org/version-control/browse/wsvn/xliff-omos/trunk/XLIFF-TBX/xliff-tbx-10.xml
Link to latest Editors' Draft of TBX mapping: https://tools.oasis-open.org/version-control/browse/wsvn/xliff-omos/trunk/XLIFF-TBX/xliff-tbx-v1.0.pdf
AI James and dF to schedule 1:1 editorial call for follow-up. / PENDING
Nothing to report. Hope to schedule 1:1 meeting in next couple of weeks.
C. Other Topics
1- Date of next meeting?
- Normally on Feb 14, 2017.
- Robert will join but can only attend from 5:15 GMT or so, this conflict until April or so
- dF: Happy to accommodate Robert, we can start JLIFF stuff after Robert joins each time..
2- Liaisons
dF/James: TBX Steering Committee / ISO TC37/SC3 => Expect next TBX IS version in late 2017
dF: XLIFF TC - XLIFF 2.1 CSPRD01 launched on 26th October, will end on 25th November
Review closed, significant changes under way:
https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/XLIFF/?selectedTab=com.atlassian.jira.jira-projects-plugin:summary-panel
Do subscribe to the comment list https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/comments/index.php?wg_abbrev=xliff
if you're not a member of the XLIFF TC you can only comment through the comment list (if you have a subscription)
You may follow the CTR discussion here https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/XLIFF-4
- dF connected Chase with Klaus Fleischmann (collecting metadata) ?? status
CSPRD02 could launch after Feb 7
3- Promotion
dF will talk on XML Prague about the ITS module in XLIFF 2.1 in early February. Soroush to give an oXygen workshop
4- AOB
==========
Minutes:
A. Admin
1- Roll call
Attendance: Phil, Soroush, David, Alan, Chase, Robert, Felix
Quorum is reached by 4 (later +Chase, so 5) out of 7 voters
2- Minutes from the last meeting
dF: I move that the meeting minutes on https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/xliff-omos/email/archives/201701/msg00002.html
are our official minutes of record for the 10th Jan meeting.
Chase: I second.
[no dissent]
dF: If no objections, approved.
B. Material
1- XLIFF OM
dF: I made some progress on the OM diagram. Some multiplicity issues have been solved since the last update. Its now complete in terms of elements, but not attributes.
dF: WRT UML, the language does not define any specific semantics for relations, there are in fact many different profiles for UML that make different conventions for the available relationships..
so if you have any issues on how the element relationships are represented currently, please notify the group via email or raise an issue on the om repo.
2- JLIFF
dF: We must concentrate on unit and sub-unit for JLIFF since we now have a clearer idea of how JIFF should work. As the file exchange is not the case for JSON, I wanted to propose a different expansion for the abbreviation. So it will make JLIFF JSON Localisation Fragment Format, not File Format as in XLIFF. It is just a simple administrative matter that can be done now easier. We also have the “fragment” keyword in our charter.
Chase: It seems like the case at the moment. But definitely it requires more thinking.
dF: Since the JLIFF acronym has not been clarified anywhere on the TC pages it doesn't require any chnages to our templates, just meeting consensus, we can and will leave this decision for the next meeting when people have had chance to think about it..
dF: Does anyone have something to add on JLIFF Repo?
Chase: I was assigned couple of action items since the last meeting and I added couple of pages on the wiki; default values for attributes in JLIFF and extensibility and modularity. The second is still in progress since it requires more thinking. The Metadata Module is the one that maps to JSON the most clearly (aside from namespace issue with must be solved later) and I started the wiki from it.
dF: I know UML can handle namespaces and namespaces are not an XML specificsc, but not sure about JSON.
Robert: There is nothing acceptable and in-use for JSON at this point and for the current version (there are some proposals, but not expected earlier than v. 5 of JSON schema).
dF: We will need to find a way for identifiers and namespaces later which would be also acceptable for the industry.
Robert: There are some conventions and notations, like the one from Google on JSON schema, that we can follow. But even if we come up with new solutions, we must document them completely.
Chase: We also might face some issues with the scope of uniqueness for the identifiers.
dF: This could be solved if we focus on ‘unit’ only, which is the scope for many ids. It was also mentioned by Felix that an issue might also appear since there is no IDREF available in JSON schema, this is vital for the purpose of our work.
Robert: We have added id and ref to JLIFF schema, but it is just our convention and could not be enforced by validators as with XML. Again, it must be mentioned in our documentation.
dF: XLIFF identifiers do not follow the generic XML ID behaviour, so there should not be an issue with defining and documenting the required convention. I will add more attributes to the diagram by the next meeting, as well as completing the extensibility. We actually could set the mda module/mechanims (as mentioned by Chase) as the generic extensibility mechanism for JLIFF and recreate other module features reusing the mda key, value pair mechanism.
Chase: Yes, we could use it as the container for any module data
dF: Our next meeting will be on 14th Feb. Thanks everybody for contributions, the meeting is now adjourned.
==========
Attendance:
| Meeting Statistics |
| Quorum rule |
51% of voting members
|
| Achieved quorum |
yes |
| Individual Attendance |
Contributing Members: 7 of 18 (38%)
Voting Members: 6 of 8 (75%) (used for quorum calculation)
|
| Company Attendance |
Contributing Companies: 7 of 14 (50%)
Voting Companies: 6 of 8 (75%)
|