Upload
nehemiah-gomer
View
218
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Click View > Slide Master to insert a photo as a background behind the colored boxes.
Click View > Slide Master to insert a photo as a background behind the colored boxes.
Driving the XLIFF Standard at Microsoft
3rd International XLIFF Symposium – 17 October 2012
Kevin O’Donnell, Senior Program Manager LeadUwe Stahlschmidt, Principal Group Manager
About This Presentation
Why XLIFF? Interoperability Working GroupXLIFF Adoption Case Study: XLIFF for WindowsLooking forward
Why XLIFF?
Localization at MicrosoftWHY XLIFF?
Localization as a business enabler Deliver technology to the next 1 billion people Windows 8/Office 2013: ~ 100 languages # of languages evaluated for each product cycle
Int’l teams integrated in Product GroupsCentralized vs. distributed Localization TeamsVendor Tools Independence Product-wide localization standards & modelsTargeted Community Localization explored by some Product Teams
Renewed interest in industry standard localization format
Benefits of XLIFF for MicrosoftWHY XLIFF?
Improve localization eco-system Increased tool/technology competition Level playing field for small/large vendors Greater support from vendors for standards
Promote vendor-tools independenceFacilitate easier vendor migrationReduce reliance on proprietary Microsoft / supplier solutions Interoperability and recyclability within MicrosoftGreater tool sharing & reuse within Microsoft
Interoperability Working Group
Interoperability working group IDriving the Standard at Microsoft
Workgroup formed July 2011 18 members representing major & minor divisions Workgroup charter established with clear targets 1-2 meetings held per month
Key focus areas Consolidate XLIFF efforts at Microsoft Gain consensus for “one XLIFF at Microsoft” (avoid fragmentation) Evangelize XLIFF across Microsoft Develop training and best practices Connect with industry bodies
PAGE 7
Interoperability working group II
CENTER OF EXCELLENCE
PAGE 8
Reviewed XLIFF requirements & implementation across Microsoft
Published ‘XLIFF Trends at Microsoft’ study
Published XLIFF Object ModelXLIFF training & documentation
XLIFF FAQs Code samples Meet-ups & talks
Championed “one XLIFF at Microsoft”
Tracked XLIFF trials and studies
Provided guidance and technical support
Shortened ramp-up time required
Socialized XLIFF extensively across the company
Liaised between Microsoft community and industry
MICROSOFT LOCALIZATION COMMUNITY
XLIFF Adoption
XLIFF AdoptionSTEADY & SIGNIFICANT
Windows International (internal) XLIFF as standard content localization format (Windows 8…) XML-XLIFF converter (various content publishing formats) XLIFF validation suite XLIFF-based recycling solution
Windows 8 – for Modern App Developers (external) Multi-Lingual App Toolkit uses common XLIFF Object Model Enable a standard translation model for modern apps based on XLIFF
Office XLIFF used for limited content localization
Office SharePoint 2013 Supporting XLIFF natively, using consistent Microsoft implementation
XLIFF evolving into mainstream content localization format
XLIFF AdoptionSUITABILITY OF CONTENT VS SOFTWARE
11
PROS
• Self-contained context• Single localizable format• Simple validation• Strong tools support
CONS
• Frequent schema changes• Cost of adoption• Challenging inline
elements
PROS
• Eliminate editor dependency
• Aids translation consistency
CONS
• Lacking context • Limited binary support• Disparate tools support• Limited meta data support• Build and validation
limitations
Winning hearts & minds
CHALLENGES
PAGE 12
Steep learning curveCulture of custom solutionsLack of awareness of XLIFFRisk of unknown technologyConcern over migration cost
Success sells Awareness of XLIFF’s evolutionShared tools developmentPartnership with loc suppliersCompelling cost saving potential
WHAT WORKED
XLIFF for WindowsCase Study
14
XLIFF for Windows: Why?CASE STUDY: XLIFF FOR WINDOWS
Windows family of products Multiple content publishing systems – custom formats, schemas &
workflow Continuous evolution of software engineering processes, file/data
formatsDisconnected flow from product team to localizationEver-increasing scale & volume vs. quality demands Inadequate localization system
Labor-intensive localization processes Error prone / late defect detection Lack of internal translation memory capability
XLIFF for Windows: How?CASE STUDY: XLIFF FOR WINDOWS
Many content systems – one localization workflowLack of adoption guidelines = steep learning curvePragmatic choices due to tool limitations
<alt-trans> Element Adapted to represent fuzzy match TMX provided for ICE, exact and fuzzy matches
Challenge of inline elements Required solution for custom code/tags in content source Trade-off between generic converter and custom schema-based
approachCreated validation & pseudo-XLIFF tools as safeguards
Simple, consistent validation
XLIFF for Windows: Results
BENEFITS
PAGE 16
Enables in-house recycling Adaptive, controlled loc modelStandard workflow for all content formats
Consistent validation externally & internally
Loc service provider collaboration & cooperation
Loc eco-system investment in standard tools platform
Key benefits of XLIFF derived from workflow
Stricter standards highlighted upstream quality gate
Challenge of in-house vs. external statistics
Limitations of XLIFF Metadata Context Tools diversity
LESSONS LEARNED
Looking forward
Looking forwardXLIFF AT MICROSOFT
FOCUS AREAS Continued adoption of XLIFF 1.2 Gradual move towards standards Greater expertise, raised awareness Evaluation of new & emerging standards
XLIFF 2.0 + Advanced metadata extensibility Metadata standardization Localization rules/validation support Support for software localization
PAGE 18