- From: Dr. David Filip <David.Filip@ul.ie>
- Date: Thu, 3 May 2012 22:40:12 +0100
- To: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Cc: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CANw5LKmghjrQZVE63eXWYpKox2uKZ9FJy+-9b=47N-tSYtRbNA@mail.gmail.com>
Felix, there seems to be some grave misunderstanding, as I do not see any of the issues that you are rising as real.. Let us make this liaison relationship an agenda point for tomorrow not to continue spreading confusion. Just quickly, this is an OASIS XLIFF TC representative (liaison) mandate and it states what its liaison (Arle) should *strive* to achieve working in the group on behalf of the said committee. It does not bind the WG to anything it has not chartered or it does not add as a later binding consensus. Finally, the XLIFF 2.0 native representation of ITS 2.0 can only be created by XLIFF TC. However, it can only be created if XLIFF TC requirements are not ignored and a reasonable level of semantic match between the standards is secured early on. This is basically all that Arle's mandate on behallf of XLIFF TC within W3C MLW-LT WG states. Rgds dF Dr. David Filip ======================= LRC | CNGL | LT-Web | CSIS University of Limerick, Ireland telephone: +353-6120-2781 *cellphone: +353-86-0222-158* facsimile: +353-6120-2734 mailto: david.filip@ul.ie On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org> wrote: > I strongly disagree with this liaison statement, David. This creates a > dependency between MLW-LT and XLIFF 2.0: > > " > > Most importantly, both groups should strive to have native representation > of MultilingualWeb-LT metadata categories in XLIFF 2.0 " > > > I am not against creating such a representation - if we have time. But I > will not agree with creating a liaison mentioning it. > > I think there is still a misunderstanding about the W3C process: > > From the W3C process point of view, we have the liaison in the charter > > http://www.w3.org/2011/12/mlw-lt-charter.html > > If you want to add anything to this liaison, e.g. wrt XLIFF 2.0, we need > to re-charter the group, including a W3C members review. I doubt that we > should spend time on this, and I think the liaison statement in the charter > is sufficient. > > Finally, I think we should invest our time in work on technical issues, > not long term liaison statements: As I said, I am not against the work on > the native representation of metadata in XLIFF 2.0 - if there is somebody > on both groups doing the work. If we don't have actual people doing that > work, no liaison statement will help us to move forward, but just block us. > > Felix > > 2012/5/3 Dr. David Filip <David.Filip@ul.ie> > > Hi all, this is the exact wording of a ballot that was approved by XLIFF >> TC with vast majority in an online TC meeting two weeks ago.. >> Arle Lommel was appointed as OASIS XLIFF TC liaison in W3C MLW-LT with >> the mandate as described below: >> >> Dear all, >> Hereby I propose to create a formal liaison with MultilingualWeb-LT and >> nominate Arle Lommel to serve as the first XLIFF TC liaison on >> MultilingualWeb-LT. The common interest of the groups has been described in >> previous messages.(details of the proposal are below in this message). >> >> I am looking for a second. >> >> Best regards >> dF >> >> >> >> >> >> This is a concise mandate for the liason (to be used in an electronic >> ballot if seconded) >> >> *Scope (work on and facilitation of the following):* >> >> 1. XLIFF TC providing business requirements to MultilingualWeb-LT, so >> that semantic match between the standards is secured early on. >> 2. Optionally, representation of MultilingualWeb-LT metadata using >> XLIFF 1.2 >> 1. Having a "profile" or mutual understanding on the best practice >> 3. Most importantly, both groups should strive to have native >> representation of MultilingualWeb-LT metadata categories in XLIFF 2.0 >> >> >> *Responsibilities:* >> >> ** >> >> The liaison will report to the P&L SC, which in turn reports at least >> monthly to XLIFF TC.**** >> >> The main duties of the liaison at MultilingualWeb-LT shall be:**** >> >> 1) Ensure that XLIFF TC viewpoint (localization roundtrip) is well >> represented during the requirements gathering. **** >> >> 2) Follow up on queries and issues logged by XLIFF TC and its members to >> ensure that they are well addressed according to W3C WG process throughout >> draft, test suit, till final recommendation.**** >> >> 3) Identify and promote opportunities for common non-normative best >> practice notes. >> >> Dr. David Filip >> ======================= >> LRC | CNGL | LT-Web | CSIS >> University of Limerick, Ireland >> telephone: +353-6120-2781 >> *cellphone: +353-86-0222-158* >> facsimile: +353-6120-2734 >> mailto: david.filip@ul.ie >> >> > > > -- > Felix Sasaki > DFKI / W3C Fellow > >
Received on Thursday, 3 May 2012 21:41:21 UTC