[Standards] UPDATED: XEP-0171 (Language Translation)

Boyd Fletcher boyd.fletcher at je.jfcom.mil
Fri Feb 15 20:35:16 UTC 2008

comments inline below.

On 2/1/08 7:27 PM, "Peter Saint-Andre" <stpeter at stpeter.im> wrote:

> XMPP Extensions Editor wrote:
>> Version 0.3 of XEP-0171 (Language Translation) has been released.
>> Abstract: This document defines an XMPP protocol extension for
>> providing language translation facilities over XMPP. It supports
>> human, machine, client-based, and server-based translations.
>> Changelog: [See revision history] (kl/bf)
>> Diff:
>> http://svn.xmpp.org:18080/browse/XMPP/trunk/extensions/xep-0171.xml?r1=257&r2
>> =1649
>> URL: http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0171.html
> As far as I can see, the earlier feedback regarding this spec has not
> yet been addressed. In particular the following issues:
> 1. Registering a translation provider with a server
> http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2006-October/012579.html
> I agree with Ralph Meijer that this can be done via entity capabilities
> (XEP-0115):
> http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2006-October/012596.html
> But it would be good for the spec to say that explicitly.
> And see also:
> http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2006-October/012581.html
> http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2006-October/012582.html
> http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2006-October/012585.html

this problem is essentially "how do remote services register themselves as a
service to an XMPP server"

Once this problem is solved for the community in a generic way, then the
lang trans spec can be updated to reflect the data fields required for a
registering a remote lang translation service.


> 2. Server-requested translation
> http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2006-October/012580.html

after investigating this further it does not appear we need to change the
spec as it already supports a mechanism for the server to ask for
translation. Essentially what Chris is suggesting here, which is a neat
idea, is translations could occur without the specific request of the user.
There is nothing stopping a developer from modifying the presence and MUC
services on an XMPP to support using XEP-171 to translate text. So we are
not sure why the spec would need to be modified.

there is one pitful however is inline automated translations, because there
are many cases where a user would not want that behavior done as machine
lang trans is not 100% and that could lead to problems/misunderstandings if
a message was translated without a user being aware of that occurring.
BTW, the language a user is speaking is identified by the XML:Lang attribute
to the presence or message packet which unfortunately major clients to not

> I think that one aspect of Chris's feedback is handled by the switch to
> use of IQs, but not all aspects.
> What do the authors of XEP-0171 think about these issues?
> I'll try to complete my own detailed review soon.
> Peter

More information about the Standards mailing list