Driving the XLIFF Standard at Microsoft

1. Kevin O’Donnell, Senior Program Manager Lead Uwe Stahlschmidt, Principal Group Manager Driving the XLIFF Standard at Microsoft 3rd International XLIFF Symposium – 17 October 2012

2. About This Presentation Why XLIFF? Interoperability Working Group XLIFF Adoption Case Study: XLIFF for Windows Looking forward

3. Why XLIFF?

4. Localization at Microsoft WHY 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 Groups Centralized vs. distributed Localization Teams Vendor Tools Independence Product-wide localization standards & models Targeted Community Localization explored by some Product Teams Renewed interest in industry standard localization format

5. Benefits of XLIFF for Microsoft WHY 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 independence Facilitate easier vendor migration Reduce reliance on proprietary Microsoft / supplier solutions Interoperability and recyclability within Microsoft Greater tool sharing & reuse within Microsoft

6. Interoperability Working Group

7. Interoperability working group I Driving 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

8. Reviewed XLIFF requirements & implementation across Microsoft Published ‘XLIFF Trends at Microsoft’ study Published XLIFF Object Model XLIFF training & documentation XLIFF FAQs Code samples Meet-ups & talks Interoperability working group II CENTER OF EXCELLENCE 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

9. XLIFF Adoption

10. XLIFF Adoption STEADY & 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

11. XLIFF Adoption SUITABILITY OF CONTENT VS SOFTWARE • 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

12. Steep learning curve Culture of custom solutions Lack of awareness of XLIFF Risk of unknown technology Concern over migration cost Winning hearts & minds CHALLENGES Success sells Awareness of XLIFF’s evolution Shared tools development Partnership with loc suppliers Compelling cost saving potential WHAT WORKED

13. XLIFF for Windows Case 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 formats Disconnected flow from product team to localization Ever-increasing scale & volume vs. quality demands Inadequate localization system Labor-intensive localization processes Error prone / late defect detection Lack of internal translation memory capability

15. XLIFF for Windows: How? CASE STUDY: XLIFF FOR WINDOWS Many content systems – one localization workflow Lack of adoption guidelines = steep learning curve Pragmatic 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 approach Created validation & pseudo-XLIFF tools as safeguards Simple, consistent validation

16. Enables in-house recycling Adaptive, controlled locmodel Standard workflow for all content formats Consistent validation externally & internally Loc service provider collaboration & cooperation Loc eco-system investment in standard tools platform XLIFF for Windows: Results BENEFITS 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

17. Looking forward

18. Looking forward XLIFF 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