Meeting minutes (informative meeting)

[Lucia Morado Vazquez <Lucia.Morado@unige.ch>]

Dear all,

 

Please find below a summary of todayâs discussion.

 

Best,

LucÃa

 

 

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

 

 

 

Attendance: Yoshito, Rodolfo, LucÃa, Mihai (Observer)

I. Administration
This meeting does not count for voterâs eligibility.

II. Technical work

A. Discussed and approved changes in the spec. Rodolfo. You can download updated versions of the specification from https://github.com/oasis-tcs/xliff-xliff-22/tree/master/xliff-22 

R: There is a new build of the spec. We have a new version of the spec in pdf of html for both. I have separated all the appendices, in a separated folder. This will simplify the maintenance of the files. The appendices are the same in both versions (core and extended). In the appendix including the changes, I did not include the URLâs of the ballots because they are not available publicly, only OASIS members can access to them.

L: thank you very much for your work, Rodolfo. Have you added the date of the meeting where the change was approved? In the meeting minutes, which are publicly available, people can find the urls of the referred ballot where the decision was made.

R: yes, I did.

L: that is great, so the information can be retrieved.

 

L: We are very happy to have Mihai to join us today. He will be officially joining the TC soon.

[Mihai introduces himself]

M: In relation to XLIFF, I have already a module that supports plurals that I would like to submit it to the TC. I have already shared it with David and Yves Savourel. And I think it is in good shape, I can share it with you. About MessageFormat v2 is still a moving thing and I do not think a module will be ready this year to be proposed.

R: What are your expectations? and regarding implementation. For example, do you want tools like okapi to implement it? Or other tools? How do you expect them to support the module?

M: I wanted to make it officially compatible in xliff. The implementation of the tools, that is the tricky thing we need to figure it out when we will write the spec of module. For example, using the notes to include the extra information.

R: The way that will be displayed to the translator is not defined yet.

M: I have some ideas. I am not sure if tools will implement them.

R: If we publish a new spec. We need to provide the explanation to the translators so they can demand the tools to implement it.

R: I was asking these questions, because we are trying to release 2.2, hopefully this year, it has minor changes.

L: So, I understanding correctly, what you will be proposing is a module, isnât it?

N: Yes, it is a module.

R: That is not a problem, we can publish modules separately.

 

 

 

B. Next steps to review the new spec.

L: we are working now on reviewing this version of the spec internally so we can have a polished version before releasing it to public review. All feedback is appreciated.

R: no new business, meeting adjourned.