Re: [xliff] XLIFF TC Teleconference - Nov-1-2011 - Summary

Hi Yves,

I posted the resulting procedure wording in the Chat window, but you probably missed it. I thought that it would be good to have the final wording as part of the minutes, maybe as an appendix.

Thanks

dF

Here it is anyway:

[start of procedure as approved by TC on Nov 1, 2011]

Feature approval procedure

Features not listed
here:

http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/XLIFF2.0/FeatureTracking

will not be considered at all for inclusion in any XLIFF 2.x spec.

The feature tracking
wiki comprises three sections. 1. Approved, 2. Under Consideration, 3.
Discarded.

Section 2. Features
under consideration is the default section:http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/XLIFF2.0/FeatureTracking#Featuresunderconsideration.28notyetevaluatedbyTC.29

Any TC member can record
a feature in Section 2., preferably following an e-mail or meeting
discussion.

Features can be moved
into section 1. or 3. only following a formal TC ballot.

Features can be proposed
for ballot in a regular TC meeting by the listed
Owner (Champion) or the TC Chair.

Owners must demonstrate
to the TC not only the technical appropriateness of the feature but also
explain what resources and timeframe is needed for elaboration and if those
resources are available.

TC Chair can suggest
moving a feature from Section 1. to section 2. Or even 3. if it does not show
reasonable progress close to XLIFF 2.x spec release deadline.

Any TC member
can suggest reconsideration of an item in section 3, and no additional
conditions apply.

 

Approval of core features

Only features in the
Section 1. Approved Features can be proposed for XLIFF 2.x Core.

This is recorded as
“Core/Module: [Not determined/Core/Module]”

Otherwise the procedure is the same as feature approval.

A feature moving away
from Section 1. gets its core status set to “Module”

“Not determined” is
being used as initial value only, all subsequent changes are between “Core” and
“Module” only.

[end of procedure]

Dr. David Filip
=======================

LRC | CNGL | LT-Web | CSIS

University of Limerick, Ireland

telephone: +353-6120-2781

mobile: +353-86-049-34-68

facsimile: +353-6120-2734

mailto: 

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 16:11, Yves Savourel <> wrote:

XLIFF TC Teleconference - Nov-1-2011 - Summary

=== 1/ Roll call

Present: Arle, Shirley, Yves, Helena, Fredrik, Tom, Bryan, Steven, David-W, David-F, Rodolfo, Lucía,

Regrets: Christian

=== 2/ Approve Tuesday, 04 October 2011 meeting minutes:

http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201110/msg00009.html

Bryan moves to approve.

Tom, Rodolfo second.

No objections.

=== 3/ Sub Committee Reports

--- 1.  Inline text (Yves)

Worked on annotations/metadata.

Summary: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff-inline/201110/msg00013.html

Rodolfo: DocBook template available on SVN

And modules will be available soon.

Yves: nice, big step forward to get the draft started

Bryan: need to make sure DocBook are correctly validated before committing to SVN.

Any recommendation welcome.

Rodolfo: DocBook to HTML and PDF available.

Fredrik: had good result with http://dblatex.sourceforge.net/

Rodolfo: note the style-sheets (we're not using the default)

Fredrik: will try things out.

--- 2. XLIFF Promotion and Liaison SC Charter (David)

- Vote on David's proposal for features for 2.0 (http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201111/msg00002.html)

David-F: Lucía is close to releasing the questions of state-of-the-art tools.

Also, may need to answer this blog: http://www.translationtribulations.com/2011/10/notes-from-xliff-symposium-in-warsaw.html

Bryan: I will do my part no later than end of week.

- ballot about the process for approving features.

Several steps:

1) choose between A: no restrictions, B: only owner can suggest reconsideration

Then if B is selected:

B1: need absolute majority

B2: 3 month limit

B3: no special conditions

If no majority, then run-off between the two top selected options

Then Yes/No vote for the whole procedure

See David-F email for details

(http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201111/msg00002.html)

Ballot: A or B

Option A passes.

Ballot: Yes or No for the whole feature approval procedure.

Yes passes.

Rodolfo: Voted no because of "Owners must demonstrate to the TC not only the technical appropriateness of the feature but also explain what resources and timeframe is needed for elaboration and if those resources are available.": need to define those things (appropriateness, etc.)

Bryan: example of reasons why a feature fail: lack of resource to define it.

Rodolfo: don't think it'll be easy to do.

But ok to move on.

=== 4/ XLIFF 2.0 (http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/XLIFF2.0/FeatureTracking)

Bryan: perhaps we need to add permanent tracking ids to titles, and not need to worry about preserving numbering scheme?

Fixed IDs could be more helpful.

Maybe we can appoint this task to wiki gardener (Bryan)?

Fredrik: valid concern if it's auto-numbered.

--- 1.  XLIFF 2.0 Technical work

a. Code and content comparison (good discussion at 18Oct2011, non-binding meeting - tracked in Inline SC)

b. Representing starting/ending/stand-alone parts (good discussion at 18Oct2011, non-binding meeting - tracked in Inline SC)

c. Segmentation feature (good discussion at 18Oct2011, non-binding meeting - tracked wiki)

Bryan: about http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/XLIFF2.0/FeatureTracking#TechnicalIssuesforXLIFF2.0

Should they be there?

David-F: those are "procedural issues"

Ok with our procedure because the procedure talks only about "features"

Bryan: what is item goes to 2 to 4?

David-F: fine, those were "mislabeled" except if someone disagrees.

Bryan: owner can move item from 2 to 4.

--- 2.  XLIFF 2.0 Technical issues

a. Added this category to FeatureTracking wiki page (http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/XLIFF2.0/FeatureTracking)

- Does this work?

Discussion on moving "Segmentation" to section 1 of feature.

Yves: moving to #1 doesn't mean the description is final

General agreement on that

David-F: should we decide if it's core or not?

Yves/Rodolfo: seem its' core because the elements are the containers

David-W: segmentation not necessarily core: it's done afterward.

Ballot to move Segmentation to #1

(not deciding if core or not)

Passes.

Action item: Yves to move item in the wiki

=== 5/ Current XLIFF business

No time to discuss most of those items.

but they are active item for current business

=== 6/ New Business

None.

-meeting adjourned

---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe, e-mail: 

For additional commands, e-mail: