Enterprise L10n Bus on the Way to Global Customers

Panel session – FEISGILTT @ LocWorld 31 Dublin, 8th June 2016, CCD

David Filip, ADAPT Centre,

Loïc Dufresne de Virel, Intel,

Kevin O’Donnell, Micrososft

Jan Bareš, Moravia

David Filip

Chair OASIS XLIFF OMOS TChttps://www.oasis-open.org/committees/xliff-omos/

Secretary OASIS XLIFF TChttps://www.oasis-open.org/committees/xliff/

Information Technology

June 2016 | Global Language Solutions | Loïc Dufresne de Virel

Information Technology 4

Continuous Localization PlatformIntel Enterprise Localization Service Bus

• Faster Content Delivery and

Self-Service for Product Groups

• Not a CMS

• Not a TMS

• Standards-Based

• Partially Open Source

• Intel Cloud + DevOps

• Web Service-First Abstraction

Layer

Content(Git, AEM, etc.)

Translation(MT, TMS, Pseudo)

Business Value

• Continuous Localization• Automation = Time to Market

• Abstraction Layer• Agility – Intel can choose best supplier system

• Reduces number of point-to-point connectors

• Translation Memories• Centralized ‘language data’ from multiple

suppliers

Information Technology 5

Last Year Vision

Information Technology 6

What has

not

changed?

Last Year Design New LocBus DesignStandards-Focused Standards-Focused

Transform to XLIFF 2.0 for Core Transform to XLIFF 2.0 for Core

Use Okapi Use Okapi

Last Year Design Focus Focus of New LocBus

Design“Research-y”, Proof-of-concept Continuous Localization

Workflows (Routing, Segmentation) Web Services and Data

Mule Core Intel Cloud Core

Okapi is library in Mule Okapi is web service in Intel Cloud

First Client: WordPress / CMIS First Client: Git / SW Resource Files

Too many hosted servers DevOps

What has

changed?

Information Technology 7

Standards-Based

Standards are building blocks to support a common Continuous Localization

Platform

• COTI Level 1 – simple input zip file structure from customers (source, target,

manifest)

• XLIFF v2.0 – for the core bilingual interchange format

• TMX v1.2b – Translation Memory Exchange, for exchanging TM’s

• SRX v1.2 or v2.0 – for common segmentation rules across our platforms

• JSON – for exchanging data that doesn’t fit into another file standard

Information Technology 8

Information Technology 9

Challenges

• Security

• Deployment of 3rd party libraries or code within Intel environment can be

tricky (code scans, penetration testing, etc.)

• Build vs Buy

• Different stakeholders have different opinions on the subject

• Good old politics ;-)

• Funded internally, constant negotiation & fight for resources

Kevin O’Donnell

REACH

XLF

LCX

XLF

LCX

12

Jan Bareš, CTO

13

Enterprise Localization bus – LSP perspective

• Moravia - localization and globalization service provider

• Developing the workflow and language technologies internally to help our

clients to reach the global customers

• Clients provide content and work in proprietary and industry CMS systems

• Tie up the various APIs/transfer channels and normalize the content and

business logic

14

Challenges

• Lack of standardized job and workflow mapping increase time to

implement business rules

• Convergence to XLIFF as interchange format grows, but not as fast as

expected from a standard. XML and XLIFF 1.2 prevalent

• Missing metadata in general from clients (context, business rules)

• Disruptive localization models operating on string level

15

Opportunities

• Standardize the data mapping interfaces for job workflows

• Perform analytical views over the transactions to drive LSP service

improvement and build predictive models

• Opportunity to define common set of Localization Service SLA

• Fully automate the workflows based on standardized data sets