The Case for Connectivity

Transcription

1 TAPICC Standards Initiative The Case for Connectivity David Filip, ADAPT Centre, Trinity College Dublin Klaus Fleischmann, Kaleidoscope, GALA Board Member Serge Gladkoff, GALA Ambassador, Logrus Global

2 Introduction Serge Gladkoff GALA Ambassador Logrus Global Klaus Fleischmann GALA Board of Directors Kaleidoscope GmbH David Filip Trinity College Dublin ADAPT Dr. David Filip is the Convener/Chair of the OASIS XLIFF OMOS TC. He also serves as the Liaison Officer, Secretary and Editor of OASIS XLIFF TC, XLIFF TC Liaison at Unicode Localization Interoperability (ULI) TC, Advisory Editorial Board Member for the MultiLingual Magazine, Programme Committee Member for the ASLING Translating and the Computer Conferences, Co-moderator Standards & Interoperability IG at JIAMCATT, NSAI expert at ISO TC 37 SC3 and SC5, ISO/IEC JTC1 WG9, WG10, SC38, TBX Steering Committee member, TAPICC Steering Committee member.

3 Agenda General Intro, Project Status (Short) Q&A Track 1 Workshop Tracks 2-4 Overview Q&A

4 TAPICC Goal Enable Innovation and Growth Through Common base standards Interoperability Automation Collaboration Seamless and valid data exchange

5 Interoperability

6 But Disclaimer I know there are less than 380 lines on the screen, but you get the idea.

7 But Things change and become very costly to maintain For clients For LSPs For tools vendors

8 The Vision: Standard APIs IT firms mytool myworkflow CMS systems

9 Breakdown of Steps Find, categorize and prioritize use cases Find out what solutions already exist Make this information retrievable Harmonize business (meta)data models Create implementable classes Useful deliverables to GALA and the industry

10 Properties Community- Driven Open-Source Legal Base Interactive and collaborative Administered by GALA Pre- Standardization Level Grounded in XLIFF and UBL

11 Setup Deliverables Categorized resource catalog Data model mapping API Classes Mode Open Source Steering Committee Subcommittees Community participation

12 Scope Track 1 Track 2 Track 3 Track 4 Supply Chain Automation Business metadata model Payload standardization Transfer of localizable content on segment / unit level Between localization or other tools Markup / Enrichment of localizable content TM Matches, MT Output, Terminology, Good enough layout, QA data etc. Enable a highfidelity rendering of layout information To allow inlayout translation

13 Benefits For GALA members, industry and project participants Learning materials Common data model to reuse Consultations about XLIFF and CLDR, API and software Sample code Implementable classes Savings on R&D Automation and Interoperability

14 Questions so far?

15 TRACK ONE WORKSHOP Look at Status of Tracks 1-3 Define concrete subtasks Discuss required business metadata for a New Basics common model Find a "buy-side" steering committee member

16 What happened so far September Project Statement Initial Call Kickoffs in Montreal and Stuttgart Definition of tracks Compiled legacy data: COTI, XLIFF, TIPP, Linport, STS Steering Committee Infrastructure (Connect, github) OpenSource Policy and Project Charter Special thanks to James Bryce Clark, OASIS

17 The Plan for Track 1 Amsterdam: Brainstorm Medata Then: harmonize and summarize Create prominent serialization (JSON, XML ) Create a draft data model / parameter set with canonical names and datatypes Finalize data model as first deliverable (eg in MuleESB) Defining the least common denominator of universal data model is key.

18 The overall landscape What exists already and can be leveraged? We don t want to reinvent wheels. XLIFF &OMOS COTI, CMIS TIPP, LINPORT,STS CLDR Many existing APIs Enthusiastic participation

19 We will not reinvent the wheel XLIFF Bitext Payload Standard - CLDR The Unicode CLDR provides key building blocks for software to support the world's languages, with the largest and most extensive standard repository of locale data available CMIS Content Management Interoperability Services DQF / MQM issue typology

20 TIPP Based on XLIFF for Payload, plus Metadata and Workflow Only one task per language? Only one target language? Envelope concept Manifest XML contains all metadata manifest.xml Package Object Container (Payload XLIFF) resources.zip Requests and Responses Implementations? Specifies tasks to be completed and responses to expect Strict XLIFF or generic Business Metadata (STS) Source content Target content Production tasks Environment Relationships language, audience, complexity language, register, layout prepare, translate technology, references permissions, submissions, expectations No API Package definition only

21 LINPORT Based on XLIFF for Payload, plus Metadata and Workflow - Bilingual Task-level package STS as Business Metadata General Source Target Workflow Business Title, creator, date, identifier, contributor, rights Language, ID, type, audience, purpose, subject, term, volume, complexity, status Language(s), audience, purpose, content correspondence, term, format, guide, register... Layout, preparation, initial, quality check, technology, reference, workplace, copyright Qualification, delivery, deadline, compensation, communication Not a very flexible data model. Same info for all files / languages. Implementations? No API Package definition only

22 COTI German CMS manufacturers: DERCOM - Extensive API SOAP? Most complete and adopted project 3 Levels Level 1: Simply wrapper file for exchange (control file and payload) Level 2: Automated transfer of level 1 Level 3: Concrete API workflow (SOAP-based) API describes Workflow: Create, start, finish, but also reject, cancel, update, Status updates: get/change metadata, report, download document Secure data transfer Issues No standard payload, little L10N metadata Implemented and in use Generic payload, not XLIFF or CMIS based Little localization metadata, but expandable

23 STS - Structured Translation Specification 21 parameters in a tree, human readable. Source content Target content Production Tasks Environment Relationships Textual characteristics Source language Text type Audience Purpose Specialized language Subject field Terminology Volume Complexity Origin Target language information Target language Target terminology Audience Purpose Content correspondence Register File format Style Style Guide Style relevance Layout Typical tasks Preparation Translation QA Additional tasks Technology Reference material Workplace Permissions Copyright Recognition Restrictions Submissions Qualifications Deliverables Delivery (by) Deadline Expectations Compensation Communication

24 Plus the crowd already out there IT firms CMS systems

25 Track 1 Supply Chain Automation Two levels make sense. But which info goes on which level? Package level metadata "Payload" metadata

26 Package-Level Data "Least common denominator" and extensibility Existing Creator, Date&time, Title, Contact info, Tool, Organization Source and target languages, deadline -> Or should this be on the payload level? Task information: Type, additional tasks Description, Comment Source and target terminology &TM data Copyright, digital signature, Response creator What else? MT admissibility and selection? Engine type? Monolingual or multilingual source/target? Project participants? (Translators, PMs...) Source system attributes ( ID?) Workflow-relevant metadata? Quote vs. Project?Different project types? Custom metadata?

27 Payload-Level Data "Least common denominator" and extensibility Existing Creator, Date&time, Title, Tool etc? Or only on package level? Source text information: Subject, reference,target audience, register etc. Target text information What else? Commercial information: Volume, payment info, analysis data? Source system attributes ( ID?) Reference external data (TMs, termbases, MT engine data) Quality requirements, QE metadata, DQF metadata? Custom metadata? Automation information (Error handling, subtasks...)

28 Your turn now!

29 Tracks 2-4: What s going on.. XLIFF 2.1 XLIFF OMOS OM & JLIFF, TBX <->XLIFF mapping TBX revision at ISO ULI starts a new work item on wordcount and similarity algorithm FREME an NLP service framework UBL a major business document exchange standard 29

30 TAPICC tracks 1) business metadata (see above) 2) real time unit level exchange between CAT tools (all sorts) [XLIFF OMOS OM & JLIFF] 3) real time enrichment of bitext units with metadata Including matches [XLIFF OMOS - TMX successor], terminology [XLIFF OMOS TBX mapping, FREME], entity disambiguation [FREME], error and QA reporting [XLIFF 2.1, FREME], you name it.. 4) Real time previews of translated content in native Currently on the back burner Possibly XLIFF 2.2, some capability in XLIFF 2.0 already 30

31 FREME: A content enrichment framework GitHub repos Apache license 31

32 FREME: Design of the framework Client makes a Web service request. The broker evokes the actual e-service. The e-services are part of the server (e.g. e-entity), or provided externally (e.g. e-translation). Supportive modules provide conversion of digital content formats or pipelining of services (e.g. e-terminology followed by e-translation) FREME = a framework, not a platform: modular approach & ease of extensibility

33 FREME: All You need is standards HTTP to make web service requests No dependency on a given programming language Standards to represent enrichment information See next slide Write a wrapper for your existing tools to enable them to produce & consume the enrichment information Enable distributed data and language technology services

34 XLIFF OMOS TC Quick Facts Convened 8 th Dec 2015, made great progress since Members: BYU, ENLASO, Hoyos Labs, Genivia, Intel, LRC, Microsoft, SDL, Spartan Software, TCD ADAPT, UNIGE, Vistatec, WIPRO, +2 Individual Charter Purpose Even more interoperability, NOT ONLY through XML. Take the data model to new environments. Facilitate roundtrip among XML and JSON pipelines and more.. Scope/Deliverables Abstract Object Model for XLIFF 2 (XLIFF 2.x) JSON Serialization of that model TBX mapping, TMX next Etc. IPR Mode Non-Assertion 34

35 XLIFF OMOS TC Membership Bryan Schnabel, Felix Sasaki 35

36 XLIFF OMOS TC Charter Scope/Deliverables Purpose Even more interoperability, NOT ONLY through XML. Take the data model to new environments. Facilitate roundtrip among XML and JSON pipelines and more.. Scope/Deliverables Abstract Object Model for XLIFF 2 (XLIFF 2.x) serialization independent JSON Serialization of that model -> JLIFF 1 TMX next major new version with inline data model consistent with XLIFF 2 Mappings, TBX Basic mapping of XLIFF 2 gls: APIs Reference Architectures, SOA, ESB.. 36

37 XLIFF OMOS TC Charter IPR Mode IPR Mode Non-Assertion A progressive IPR mode, a kind of RF but even more easy on both IP owners and implementers. Great for Open Source adoption! No need to negotiate RF licensing conditions for essential use of IP in standards implementations 37

38 XLIFF OMOS TC Charter Audience Audience Multilingual content and software architects and strategists, multilingual content publishers GILT services architects and developers Content owners and managers that seek to publish their content in multiple localized versions Software providers for internationalization, localization, and translation tools and processes, including language technology components Technical communicators employing localization tools and processes for multilingual publishing of their content Localization service providers who need to interact seamlessly with localizable and localized content of their customers 38

39 XLIFF OMOS TC Audience - FEISGILTT Save the dates October 31-November th FEISGILTT 8 th XLIFF LocWorld35 Silicon Valley FEISGILTT

40 XLIFF OMOS TC Audience FEISGILTT 7th XLIFF Symposium Hot topics XLIFF Object Model XLIFF in JSON Federated Interoperability Track 1st TMX Symposium Is this the time for TMX 2.0? If you are a stakeholder in the TMX community heavily relying on TMX 1.4b, we want to hear your feature wishlist. TMX related submissions can be proposed on the FEISGILTT EasyChair 40

41 XLIFF OMOS TC Audience - Join Public TC page Join Send a comment Publicly archived mailing lists 41

42 Questions?

43 THANK YOU Want to Contribute? Discussion Join the Connect Group: -> TAPICC group Submit information on projects we have missed so far via the Connect Group Participate in collaborative R&D and content creation, contribute code Submit information on projects we have missed so far via the Connect Group Participate in the public review of our output