3rd Face to Face - Washington D.C.

When:  Dec 12, 2003 from 08:00 to 12:00 (ET)
Description:

==========
Agenda: 3rd XLIFF TC Face to Face Meeting, in conjunction with the LISA Forum USA http://www.lisa.org/events/2003dc/ _______________________________________________________________________________________________ Date: Friday, 12 December 2003 Time: 8am - 12 noon Venue: Hyatt Regency Hotel Capital Hill, 400 New Jersey Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 20001 USA Hotel website: http://washingtonregency.hyatt.com/property/index.jhtml _______________________________________________________________________________________________ Dial-up instructions: to be communicated later Note: No video conference facility for this meeting _______________________________________________________________________________________________ Agenda: 8:00: Welcome, introductions, agenda tweak, etc. 8:05 Summary of XLIFF TC achievements since last F2F 1.1 Committee Specification and XSD Standardised XLIFF presentation 1.1 Whitepaper 1.1 Website FAQ 1.1 Peer Review Adoption by vendor/publisher communities 8:15 XLIFF 1.1 complimentary work Canonical Representation Guide: -resource profiles agree to list of resources assign owners to individual resources agree to schedule of deliverables -"cookbook" examples Sketch out contents at a high level assign owners to major sections Implementation Guides best practices for developing proprietary filters case studies for mapping proprietary resource to XLIFF working with Web Services 9:30 Post Mortem of XLIFF 1.1 spec process Industry perception of XLIFF What went well What didn't go well Suggestions for improvement Improvement Implementation Plan 10:00 Break 10:15 What's next? Conclude standards submission process -blocking issues Discuss post 1.1 options (once complimentary work is done) -Place TC in holding pattern with bi-monthly or quarterly meetings -Conclude XLIFF TC - with option to restart if / when needed -"Clarify" charter to extend TC's work to XLIFF 1.x / 2.0 -Other suggestions 11:30 Review action item assignments, and any items in the "unresolved issues bucket" Noon Break for, or work through lunch, depending upon progress. 12:45 Adjourn meeting

==========
Minutes: Attendees: DC: Tony, Yves, Shigemichi, John Tel: Mat, Enda, David, Gerard Observers: Andzrej Zydron, Kara Warburton, Dave Walters, Arle Lommel Agenda: 8:00: Welcome, introductions, agenda tweak, etc. no tweaks 8:05 Summary of XLIFF TC achievements since last F2F 1.1 Committee Specification and XSD Standardised XLIFF presentation 1.1 Whitepaper 1.1 Website FAQ 1.1 Peer Review Adoption by vendor/publisher communities Tony listed the following implementations: - RWS: Utilities to extract to XLIFF; Rainbow; various XLIFF XSLT, etc. - Alchemy Catalyst 5.0, visual XLIFF editor in separate module - XML.Intl: editing support - Heartsome: online XLIFF editor - SDL: XML filter, needs target to be populated - Trados: none but tageditor - Passolo: visual XLIFF editor in a free downloadable module - Bowne: Elcano - Oracle: Hyperhub, internal editor 8:15 XLIFF 1.1 complimentary work Canonical Representation Guide: -resource profiles agree to list of resources assign owners to individual resources agree to schedule of deliverables -"cookbook" examples Sketch out contents at a high level assign owners to major sections Implementation Guides best practices for developing proprietary filters case studies for mapping proprietary resource to XLIFF working with Web Services Tony presented a list from Mat: - asp - html - javaclass - javapropertyresourcebundle - javaproperetyresource - javascript - resx - rtf - winres - plaintext - xml Additionally we discussed: - baml (binary blob in resx) - xaml - msi - inf It was pointed out that the winres spec had been worked on and was close to completion. Also, Catalyst & Passolo had implemented based on that work. There was some discussion about whether to just do generic guidelines of objects/types regardless of source format or do a representation for each. It was suggested that we do both the generic dialog representation with file format specific canonical representation that conformed to the generic guidelines. It was agreed to start with win32 work as a basis for the generic since so much has already been done. John will forward his latest work to the group; Gerard will compare that with resx; Tony will look at Java Resource Bundles. That spec will be made generic and get rid of winres specific names. html and rtf are markup langugaes and don't lend themselves to the same representations. Thus, separate work would need to be carried on for these formats. It was agreed to do this in parallel. Tony will ask Bryan and Doug if they would llike to work on these. Since javaclass is an un-i18n file, John vehemently opposed doing anything with this format. There was some concensus on this point. java resource bundles should be able to map to the generic type work we are doing. Tony will compare them with the winres spec. The initially presented list morphed into the following list of issues: Generic objects: Dialogs, Forms Menus String Tables, Messages Markup with inline tags (e.g., RTF, HTML Tags) Etc. asp HTML, rtf (Bryan, Doug?) javaresourcebundle (list, property) Tony javascript Resx – Gerard -> Enda XAML BAML winres - almost finished but missing Markup. John to send out updated version msi, inf (examples) Embedded XLIFF in XML (examples) Skeleton File 9:30 Post Mortem of XLIFF 1.1 spec process Industry perception of XLIFF Tony reported that at the recent LRC, XLIFF was mentioned negatively by 2 separate tool vendors. The problems reported are that there is no clear representation of resources and publishers (clients) are asking for it with unrealistic expectations of what it can do and the vendors ability to handle it. What went well XLIFF reached the committee specification level. In 1.1 we added extensibility through the namespace mechanism. What didn't go well 1. Attendance has been a problem, Tony is being forced to follow Oasis rules, which will move inactive voting members to observer status. 2. Gerard mentioned that drafting vs. issue resolution was 50-50 and should have been 80-20. 3. Members not prepared at meetings. 4. Ineffective use of mailing list, use more rather than phone 5. Proposal process has been too easy, this led to constant changes with little time to investigate the ramifications. 6. Couldn't make major changes because it was a point release. Suggestions for improvement Improvement Implementation Plan 10:00 Break 10:15 What's next? Conclude standards submission process -blocking issues - address errata - collect more input - complete 1.1 specification work in January '04. - need certification of 1.1 use from 3 Oasis members - Oracle needs legal approval for their certification - Tony will approach Connect (Steven Flinter) Discuss post 1.1 options (once complimentary work is done) -Place TC in holding pattern with bi-monthly or quarterly meetings -Conclude XLIFF TC - with option to restart if / when needed -"Clarify" charter to extend TC's work to XLIFF 1.x / 2.0 -Other suggestions - L10n directive: (Shigemichi, Gerard) in XLIFF - SKL file issues - Andzrej has proposal specific to XML - It may be premature to decide what we'll do wwhen finished since 11:30 Review action item assignments, and any items in the "unresolved issues bucket" * Monthly meeting instead of weekly. * Kara Warburton reported the following issues: 1. mrk has too much info in the mtype (it is overloaded), should be 2 elements: term and mrk IBM should be IBM We cannot use tbx namespace here because does not allow extension points 2. state-qualifier has the same issue .... 3. Wwe need a glossary in the spec of esoteric and obscure terms 4. editorial needs - descriptions are totally useless - need examples Noon Break for, or work through lunch, depending upon progress. 12:45 Adjourn meeting ACTION ITEMS: 1. John will forward the latest Novell Formats specification, with winres, java properties, and others, after passing it through legal. (Due: 03/12/19) 2. Tony will ask Brian & Doug to look at html & rtf. (Due: 03/12/19) 3. Gerard & Enda will review resx to determine if the winres spec satisfies those requirements. (Due: 04/1/16 [dialogs first]) 4. Tony will review java resource bundles to determine if the winres spec satisfies those requirements. (Due: 04/1/16 [dialogs first]) 5. John will review java properties to determine if the winres spec satisfies those requirements. (Due: 04/1/16 [dialogs first]) 6. John will create a template for the formal proposal process. (Due: 04/1/16) 7. Tony will create a change mgmt process. (Due: 04/1/16)

==========
Attendance:

Achieved quorum: false
Counts toward voter eligibility: true

Individual Attendance
  • Members: 9 of 41 (21%)
  • Voting Members: 7 of 17 (41%) (used for quorum calculation)
Company Attendance
  • Companies: 5 of 19 (26%)
  • Voting Companies: 4 of 10 (40%)

Quorum rule: 51% of voting members