Description: Standing monthly XLIFF TC Teleconference.
1. Call one of the MeetingPlace phone numbers:
From the AMER region dial: * 1-888-967-2253 * +1-650-607-2253
From the APAC region dial: * +61 2 8817 6100
From the EMEA region dial: * +44 118 924 9000
2. Enter the Meeting ID (805534) followed by the # key
3. If the organizer has not started the meeting you will be:
a. Asked to speak your name followed by the # key
b. Placed in the waiting room on music hold until the organizer starts the meeting.
If the organizer has started the meeting you will be:
a. Asked to enter the Meeting Password (030543)
b. Asked to speak your name followed by the # key
==========
Agenda: Agenda:
1/roll call
2/Previous meeting minutes (to be specified shortly) Amend, Approve, Reject as official record
3/ Work in Progress:
A. XLIFF 1.2 Specification
Committee Spec Process:
The Official OASIS announcement of XLIFF 1.2 Public Review commenced on 14 July 2006. The review lasted 60 days and ended 12 September. In the meeting we will review the comments made and any alterations to the spec or supporting materials required in order to conduct a formal ballot for acceptance of work as Committee Specification.
To progress the work towards an OASIS standard, we need affidavits from OASIS corporate members within the next few weeks:
The OASIS TC standards process requires that we submit 3 affidavits from Organisational members (ie., not individual or associate members) in order to submit the spec to OASIS standard process. The following is an acceptable template for such affidavits:
"I certify that is successfully using the XLIFF 1.2 specification, as approved for submission to the OASIS membership, consistent with the requirements of the OASIS Technical Committee Process."
Remaining related work:
Update whitepaper to summarise 1.2 revisions.
Update FAQ to summarise 1.2 revisions.
B. Deferred Open issues:
a. Translation of Voice XML Issues
UPDATE (5 Mar 2006) from Mat: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/200603/msg00003.html
Archived Historical detail:
~ Open until resolution of namespace issue.
- Mat confirmed that this issue is currently on hold. He will raise again when it becomes an issue in the future.
Initial: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/200403/msg00016.html
Update: http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/200403/msg00017.html
b. Extending XLIFF with separate namespaces.
Some thought has been put into this issue but not yet even in draft form.
ACTION ITEM: Mat & Andzrej were to work offline to advance this work, but Andzrej has at least temporarily taken leave from the TC. We need to work out who will advance this work.
c. (Closed - placeholder for revision of FAQ/Whitepaper) Best practice: should extraction process create target elements?
Topic proposed by Doug. Discussed in mailing list:
Initial Proposal (Doug): http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/200603/msg00023.html
Comment (Bryan): http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/200603/msg00025.html
Comment (Tony): http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/200603/msg00035.html
Comment (Rodolfo): http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/200603/msg00032.html
The optional meeting took place Thursday 1 June. The meeting notes are detailed here: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/200606/msg00006.html
As a very brief summary, it was agreed that any XLIFF compliant tool should be capable of dealing with empty target elements, since it valid XLIFF. We did not feel it necessary to make any changes to the spec, but felt that an entry in the FAQ and/or whitepaper covering the topic would be helpful. We'll keep this item as a working agenda item until it's time to revise the FAQ / Whitepaper with this information.
d. (OPEN) XLIFF - DITA Best Practices:
Purpose of this discussion is to brainstorm what the TC can and should do to provide guidance to those who want to localise / translate DITA content, with potential recommended best practice centered around XLIFF as intermediate container.
Meeting was held on Thursday, 15 June -> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/200606/msg00014.html
RECOMMENDATION TO XLIFF TC:
The best practice of interchanging data between DITA and XLIFF is the same issue as how to interchange data XML and XLIFF in general... e.g., how to use XLIFF with ITS, XML:tm, etc. We suggest that the TC author profile documents similar to the other profiles we've developed, ie, HTML profile... in them we recommend which elements to use or avoid, skeleton file approach, transformation approach, other common problems and recommended solutions. Should address XLIFF ITS, XLIFF XML:TM, XLIFF DITA, maybe XLIFF Docbook.
We need to work out what if anything is required to advance this work.
4/XLIFF 1.2 Certification activities:
Feedback and report from Reinhard if he is in attendance.
5/XLIFF Face to Face?
There's an OASIS Open Standards Day happening in Germany at the tekom conference (Europe's largest multi-lingual software trade show). The TC hasn't had a TC F2F in years, and it would be good timing to schedule a TC Face to Face to brainstorm what our next objectives and steps should be.
Date: 8-9 November 2006
Location: Wiesbaden, Germany
Venue: Rhein-Main-Hallen
Hosted by: Gesellschaft fr technische Kommunikation e.V. - tekom
Website: http://www.tceurope.org/conference/tcworld.htm
At the last meeting it was suggested this would be a good idea, but more details are required in order to justify travel, etc. Alternatively, a F2F can be held during the LRC XI Conference in Dublin, 25th-26th October 2006. (http://www.localisation.ie/resources/conferences/2006/index.htm)
NOTE: a ballot was submitted to the TC and initial results support the LRC venue as the most prefered face to face venue. We will discuss logistics and planning at the teleconference.
6/TC IPR Policy Transition
A ballot was submitted to the TC to specify which new OASIS IPR policy the TC will transition to. We will discuss the ballot results at the teleconference and decide on next steps in the process.
7/ Reports from liaisons involved with other standards groups:
A. W3C i18n
B. Oscar
C. Trans-WS
D. LRC
E: OASIS DITA Translation Subcommittee
8/Any Other Business
==========
Minutes: Agenda:
1/roll call – There were 9 members present as recorded in Kavi.
Apologies: Matt
2/Previous meeting minutes (to be specified shortly) Amend, Approve, Reject as official record
We have a problem with out minutes for the last week. We will approve this at the next meeting.
3/ Work in Progress:
A. XLIFF 1.2 Specification
Committee Spec Process:
The Official OASIS announcement of XLIFF 1.2 Public Review commenced on 14 July 2006. The review lasted 60 days and ended 12 September. In the meeting we will review the comments made and any alterations to the spec or supporting materials required in order to conduct a formal ballot for acceptance of work as Committee Specification.
Doug mentioned there was a consistency issue raised in the review and he changed the xsd to match the specification. We will force uniqueness on the name attribute. The PO representation guide has to be changed because of this.
There was a unanimous vote in favour of this.
Yves had a raised an issue regarding SRX. Rodolfo mentioned that this is being rewritten and we may have a useable version by the end of the year. We agreed that we will remove the reference to a version number with SRX.
There were a number of typos raised.
It was not clear as what Seg-source did. We agreed that it should be the same content as (as the XSD shows). Tony will fix this in the spec.
Yves also raised the issue of the optional ts attribute. As this was being deprecated in 1.1 it did not make sense adding it an element which was added in version 1.2. The reason for this was that we wanted it to be able to have the same attributes as the source element.
Fredrik Corneliusson raised an issue about spaces between trans-unit. There is no action needed on this.
We need to make a change to the version number of the RFC for language codes.
Reformats are being fixed by a schema change.
We agreed to remove spurious annotation from the element.
After the specification we can vote on this again, there is then a shorter review period and the specification can be proposed as an OASIS specification.
Bryan proposed a vote of thanks to Doug and Rodolfo which was passed unanimously.
To progress the work towards an OASIS standard, we need affidavits from OASIS corporate members within the next few weeks:
The OASIS TC standards process requires that we submit 3 affidavits from Organisational members (ie., not individual or associate members) in order to submit the spec to OASIS standard process. The following is an acceptable template for such affidavits:
"I certify that is successfully using the XLIFF 1.2 specification, as approved for submission to the OASIS membership, consistent with the requirements of the OASIS Technical Committee Process."
Tony stressed that this was very important to get these affidavits.
Remaining related work:
Update whitepaper to summarise 1.2 revisions.
Update FAQ to summarise 1.2 revisions.
Tony volunteered to create a whitepaper for 1.2 and suggested this could be used as the basis for the FAQs
B. Deferred Open issues:
a. Translation of Voice XML Issues
UPDATE (5 Mar 2006) from Mat: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/200603/msg00003.html
Archived Historical detail:
~ Open until resolution of namespace issue.
- Mat confirmed that this issue is currently on hold. He will raise again when it becomes an issue in the future.
Initial: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/200403/msg00016.html
Update: http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/200403/msg00017.html
b. Extending XLIFF with separate namespaces.
Some thought has been put into this issue but not yet even in draft form.
ACTION ITEM: Mat & Andzrej were to work offline to advance this work, but Andzrej has at least temporarily taken leave from the TC. We need to work out who will advance this work.
To be discussed at a later stage.
c. (Closed - placeholder for revision of FAQ/Whitepaper) Best practice: should extraction process create target elements?
Topic proposed by Doug. Discussed in mailing list:
Initial Proposal (Doug): http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/200603/msg00023.html
Comment (Bryan): http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/200603/msg00025.html
Comment (Tony): http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/200603/msg00035.html
Comment (Rodolfo): http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/200603/msg00032.html
The optional meeting took place Thursday 1 June. The meeting notes are detailed here: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/200606/msg00006.html
As a very brief summary, it was agreed that any XLIFF compliant tool should be capable of dealing with empty target elements, since it valid XLIFF. We did not feel it necessary to make any changes to the spec, but felt that an entry in the FAQ and/or whitepaper covering the topic would be helpful. We'll keep this item as a working agenda item until it's time to revise the FAQ / Whitepaper with this information.
d. (OPEN) XLIFF - DITA Best Practices:
Purpose of this discussion is to brainstorm what the TC can and should do to provide guidance to those who want to localise / translate DITA content, with potential recommended best practice centered around XLIFF as intermediate container.
Meeting was held on Thursday, 15 June -> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/200606/msg00014.html
Rodolfo mentioned that he was working on a whitepaper for this and it would be available on http://www.heartsome.org/hswiki/DITA_XLIFF
RECOMMENDATION TO XLIFF TC:
The best practice of interchanging data between DITA and XLIFF is the same issue as how to interchange data XML and XLIFF in general... e.g., how to use XLIFF with ITS, XML:tm, etc. We suggest that the TC author profile documents similar to the other profiles we've developed, ie, HTML profile... in them we recommend which elements to use or avoid, skeleton file approach, transformation approach, other common problems and recommended solutions. Should address XLIFF ITS, XLIFF XML:TM, XLIFF DITA, maybe XLIFF Docbook.
We need to work out what if anything is required to advance this work.
4/XLIFF 1.2 Certification activities:
Feedback and report from Reinhard if he is in attendance.
5/XLIFF Face to Face?
There's an OASIS Open Standards Day happening in Germany at the tekom conference (Europe's largest multi-lingual software trade show). The TC hasn't had a TC F2F in years, and it would be good timing to schedule a TC Face to Face to brainstorm what our next objectives and steps should be.
Date: 8-9 November 2006
Location: Wiesbaden, Germany
Venue: Rhein-Main-Hallen
Hosted by: Gesellschaft fr technische Kommunikation e.V. - tekom
Website: http://www.tceurope.org/conference/tcworld.htm
At the last meeting it was suggested this would be a good idea, but more details are required in order to justify travel, etc. Alternatively, a F2F can be held during the LRC XI Conference in Dublin, 25th-26th October 2006. (http://www.localisation.ie/resources/conferences/2006/index.htm)
NOTE: a ballot was submitted to the TC and initial results support the LRC venue as the most prefered face to face venue. We will discuss logistics and planning at the teleconference.
We had a discussion on the face to face meeting. Some people who had thought they could not attend Tekom can now attend. It was also pointed out that Tekom is an OASIS conference. It was agreed to have the meeting on the Friday of the Tekom conference.
6/TC IPR Policy Transition
A ballot was submitted to the TC to specify which new OASIS IPR policy the TC will transition to. We will discuss the ballot results at the teleconference and decide on next steps in the process.
The vote was passed for RF and RAND IPR policy. There now has to be an unaminous ballot on this with votes from the TC and person in their organisation who is the primary OASIS member.
7/ Reports from liaisons involved with other standards groups:
A. W3C i18n
B. Oscar
C. Trans-WS
D. LRC
E: OASIS DITA Translation Subcommittee
8/Any Other Business
==========
Attendance:
Meeting Statistics |
Quorum rule |
51% of voting members |
Achieved quorum |
true |
Counts toward voter eligibility |
true |
Individual Attendance |
Members: 9 of 37 (24%) Voting Members: 9 of 13 (69%) (used for quorum calculation) |
Company Attendance |
Companies: 8 of 24 (33%) Voting Companies: 8 of 12 (66%) |