Title: Re: [chairs] need your comments on DocMgmt system requirements
If indeed we are talking about the second phase, then I'd
be happy with HTML. That said, we should allow for access to a version of the
document (e.g. PDF) that supports a means of displaying line numbering and
formatted printing for example as this is rather useful for the purpose of
obtaining comments and providing responses during the course of a spec's
review.
From: Rogers, Tony [mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 15:07
To: Luc Cl幦ent;
; Chairs OASIS
Cc: lomas >> Jeff
Lomas
Subject: RE: [chairs] need your comments on DocMgmt system
requirements
I may have misunderstood - I thought we were talking about using HTML in
the "second-phase" - that is, in the documents that are being made publicly
visible. I think that's not unreasonable, because these are documents that
should be past being edited heavily, and should be "cleaned up" anyway (I would
not want to release a document to the public with "track changes" switched
on...)
During the sand-box phase, I would like to have Word's tracking, or some
similar facility.
-----Original Message-----
From: Luc Cl幦ent
[mailto:]
Sent: Thu 19-Feb-04 10:01
To:
Rogers, Tony; ; 'Chairs OASIS'
Cc: 'lomas
>> Jeff Lomas'
Subject: RE: [chairs] need your comments on
DocMgmt system requirements
Whoaaa ... MS Word's revision capabilities (whether they
work well or not) are invaluable in multi-editor situations. So NO I could not
live with HTML.
From: Rogers, Tony [mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 14:57
To:
; Chairs OASIS
Cc: lomas >> Jeff
Lomas
Subject: RE: [chairs] need your comments on DocMgmt system
requirements
HTML I could live with - I already use HTML for documents on a regular
basis. Should be able to get reasonable DIFFs between arbitrary HTML
docs.
XML? That would be a harder sell - I don't have a WYSIAWYG editor for an
XML document :-)
Tony Rogers
-----Original Message-----
From: Karl F. Best
[mailto:]
Sent: Thu 19-Feb-04 9:51
To: Chairs OASIS
Cc: lomas >> Jeff Lomas
Subject: Re: [chairs] need your comments on DocMgmt system
requirements
Excellent comments, everyone. Keep 'em coming.
I see
a consensus that we want a sandbox as a phase prior to checkin
and
version control, and a suggestion to use wiki for the sandbox. We
will
need to have access control too, to restrict this to the TC
members.
I see a lot of pros-n-cons for using MSWord together with
CVS in the
second phase, especially as it relates to change control.
We're not
committed to CVS yet; that's just a popular suggestion. How
would you
feel about a requirement to do all of your documents in HTML or
XML?
i.e. no proprietary or binary formats. (Now there's a big can of
worms
to open :-) I'm not making any threats; just wondering if that
might be
a good way to go. Perhaps this would require OASIS providing
tools for
the TCs to use; we'd have to ask some vendors for
contributions.
If we did use some text-based format (as above), would
CVS provide us
with change
logs?
-Karl
