W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org > November 2014

RE: [xliff] ITS module section(s) in the specification

From: Serge Gladkoff <serge.gladkoff@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 09:48:27 +0300
To: "'Felix Sasaki'" <felix@sasakiatcf.com>, "'Dr. David Filip'" <David.Filip@ul.ie>
Cc: "'Yves Savourel'" <ysavourel@enlaso.com>, "'XLIFF Main List'" <xliff@lists.oasis-open.org>, <public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <007b01d0087b$d2e9c640$78bd52c0$@gmail.com>
Dear Colleagues,

 

I am planning an informational update across language industry community
shortly.

 

Can you please help me with short recap of the current status, of XLIFF2.1 /
ITS 2.0 project, please?

 

Very Best Regards,

Serge Gladkoff

GALA CRISP Lead

 

 

 

From: Felix Sasaki [mailto:felix@sasakiatcf.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 9:11 AM
To: Dr. David Filip
Cc: Yves Savourel; XLIFF Main List; public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org
Subject: Re: [xliff] ITS module section(s) in the specification

 

Hi David, all,

 

Am 24.11.2014 um 23:58 schrieb Dr. David Filip <David.Filip@ul.ie>:





 

On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 10:01 PM, Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org> wrote:

Am I missing something: If the specification is not finished, then the
appendix should not be published, no matter if normative or not, no?


Felix, the specification is in progress, when it is finished then it can go
into publishing/approval process. [csd -> csprd -> cs -> cos -> os]

Currently, I provide from time to time editors draft printouts when a part
that makes sense is finished.

 

The working draft has no level of approval whatsoever, it is just easier to
discuss solutions IMHO with a strawman at hand..

 

 

Thanks of the explanation. I think I understand the process. My main point
was about what you said: 

 

"Again, the detailed specification is not done and I am not sure if it makes

logical sense to make the appendix normative. I tend to think not atm.."

 

This sounded to me: you say that in the final specification (os) the
appendix should not be normative?

 

- Felix
Received on Tuesday, 25 November 2014 06:49:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:11:31 UTC