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