OASIS Open

  https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/905529225

Use your microphone and speakers (VoIP) - a headset is recommended. Or, call in using your telephone.

   France: +33 (0) 182 880 780

   Germany: +49 (0) 892 2061 159

   Spain: +34 911 23 0850

   Sweden: +46 (0) 852 500 612

   United Kingdom: +44 (0) 203 535 0611

   United States: +1 (773) 945-1031

Access Code: 905-529-225

Audio PIN: Shown after joining the meeting

Meeting ID: 905-529-225

Attendance: Helena, Lucia, Shirley, David Filip, Fredrik, Joachim, Tom, Uwe, Yves, David Walters.

I Administration (0:00 - 0:10)

Bryan:

The public review comments will be active until October 5. We need to assign the comments and see if substantial changes are needed or only editorial. We are also collecting statements of use. We can track them in the wiki.

I move to approve the meeting minutes . Approve previous meeting minutes, 17 September 2013 https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201309/msg00063.html

David : I second.

No objections.

II XLIFF 2.0 (0:10 - 0:45)

1. Public Review II is underway. It will conclude on the 5^th October. And then we will have the opportunity to assess the comments whether they are substantional or editiorial.

[Bryan shows the comments track page on the wiki]

David: Chet has said that it was a good method.

[Bryan explains how the table of the tracker works. Comments from the first review are frozen. In this second review numbers of id comments started at 100.]

David: can we assign some owners to the answer the comments in this meeting?

Bryan: Absolutely. That will be a good idea.

            Comment 100. Suggested by Bryan, adding some examples to the spec. Any thoughts on who should be the owner of this one?

David: If I remember corrected, Friedik had some examples in the modules.

Bryan: in the translation candidates modules there is a robust example.  In the glossary, metadata, resources, size restriction, validation and format module we can also find examples.

Friedrik, could you have an example on the other

David: I can take the matches examples. But we need to assign the core example.

Bryan: I assume we would need all core elements, annotations, subflows, etc in that example, it should be a robust case. The other thing would be the segmentation.

Friedrik: I can volunteer to do some inline examples.

Bryan: Thank you, that would be great.

David: in terms of numbers, I obviously take all the editorial ones (typos, and spelling).  109 and 111. I think we need to have some discussions on ids. I believe these two principles of adding ids should be discussed on this review.

Friedrik: No objection, but there might be a simple solution. We could simply say that a match does not reference to anything refers to the unit as a whole. So then we do not need to specify segments for the same units.

David: I think we do need to have the discussion now. It is kind of longstanding issue. Our constraint is that we say that ids need to be unique, but unique under a specific scope. I think that this needs to be addressed.

Bryan: so David, you will initiate the discussion via email on ids (comments 109, 111).

David: Yes, I think that that might be the best.

Bryan: do we have more volunteers on 100 comment? I will own this comment and then

David: I think Uwe might be a good person for doing this.

Bryan: I take 101 too.

David: I take 102.

Bryan: 103

F: I did similar work on this area. I do agree with Yves. Right now we cannot implement a custom extension before the modules.

D: You can start the discussion on this.

F: Sure.

B: 104.

F: Similar to the previous one, I can take that one too.

B:105. We need to fix the example. We can assign it to Ryan.

D: It is a minor thing.

B:106. Typo.

T: I will take it.

B: Do we add to that comment any other typos found?

D: It will be useful to have them all recorded. We can quote the comment 106 when we find a typo.

T: That makes sense to me.

B: I will add schema issues (112).

D: the comment you sent today to the list, should be added as a comment.

B: Ok, I will record it as well. And I will assign to David. That will be comment 113.

B:107.

D: I can take it, I can make sure that it is uniform.

B: 108. That goes to me.

B: 110.

D: This seems quite editorial, I can take it. Please comment owners, try to solve them before next meetings. And if any other comment comes, we can assign them.

B: I can assign them as soon as we receive them.

D: that would be a good idea.

B: there will be a third public review, that seems reasonable.

B: I would like to have some feedback of the state of statements of use tracker.

[Bryan shows the tracking page he designed]

This tracker gives a good view of the features that the tools cover. If we have a yes for all the features we have a implementable spec.

D: it is good, but the graphic representation might be improved if we subcathegorised under core some of the points.

Y: We need to distinguish the type of agent that we have. And I think that if you support a module you should support the core.

D: Yes, you are right about the type of agent, we should add that distinction.

F: but it is obviously impossible to implement a tool processing most modules that does not in some way handle core

B: I propose to have this document to be the initial tracker to the statements of use.

B: David, can you give us a P&L report?

D: Good news, that there will be a talk in Santa Clara about XLIFF 2.0 from Uwe and Ryan.

The doodle call that I posted, if you can add your availability for these dates in December and January.

B: Meeting adjourned.

I Administration (0:00 - 0:10)

  A. Roll call

  B. Approve previous meeting minutes, 17 September 2013 https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201309/msg00063.html

II XLIFF 2.0 (0:10 - 0:45)

  A. Public Review II is underway

     1. Announcement: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff/201309/msg00046.html Ends 05 Oct.

     2. Public Review Comments are tracked here https://wiki.oasis-open.org/xliff/XLIFF%202.0%20Public%20Review%20submitted%20comments%20tracker

     3. Timeline https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/xliff/email/archives/201309/msg00029.html

III XLIFF 2.X? 3.0? (0:45 - 0:50)

    1. Freeze on Feature Tracking wiki? Or queue proposed post 2.0 features there?

    2. Do we have an official path for promoting custom namespace to supported core/module post XLIFF 2.0?

IV  Charter (Bryan to update site)

V   Sub Committee Report (0:50 - 0:55)

VI  Current and New Business (0:55 - )

• OASIS Open (General Membership)
• General Public