+1
I
just do not see at this point a strong enough reason to coerce everyone into
using the same source format.
If
that is desirable from an OASIS house-keeping viewpoint, getting there
should just be a gradual, voluntary process - the carrot, not the
stick...
jacques
From: David RR Webber (XML)
[mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2010 2:11
PM
To:
Subject: [chairs]
Practical considerations and impacts of mandated editing formats
/tools
My experience with this in the past is that this imposes an unacceptable
barrier to the volunteers who do the hard work of actually editing and
completing the specifications.
Once you start needing to install add-ins and scripts and all kinds of
non-default pieces into editing tools things rapidly get out of control.
What one person sees in their environment is not what someone else
has.
I always hear "well it works wonderfully for our TC" - but then those same
people are not the ones responsible for fixing your PC and editor and documents
and providing support to your deadlines. Or working with a TC member who
is likewise being challenged sending in edits. Training is another
issue.
I'd strongly prefer to not open this whole can of worms - and allow TCs to
continue tp decide - as now - what tools they are most comfortable with using
for developing their specifications. If something is suggested and
provided to assist - that's fine - but that's not the same as mandating
something.
DW
