Hi Rick
2009/3/4 <>:
>> Hi Paul,
>>
>> In general, yes. The piece that's missing is that this list is intended
>> to be "input only" - that is, one should not expect discussion from TC
>> members on any of the posts on this list. The intent is that the posts
>> would be discussed by the TC which would then decide what action, if
>> any, to take.
>
> You say "one should not *expect* discussion" which is fine. However from
> the latest ODF TC minutes:
>
> "Michael asked that in alignment with the OASIS technical committee
> process *no* discussions should take place on the public comment mailing
> list."
>
> These are clearly not the same thing. For example, under what Mary said,
> an interested, engaged TC member could ask for clarification or suggest
> other angles to a comment on the public list, at their discretion, but
> with no obligation. Under what Michael has said, this is positively
> disallowed under the OASIS process. (Under Michael's interpretation, there
> is in fact *no* forum provided by OASIS for public discussion of the draft
> or future ODF specs?)
>
> Which is correct please?
>
>> If individuals want to take an active role in the
>> development of the spec, they should then join the technical committee
>> itself.
>
> Certainly. However community engagement is often regarded as a sign of
> openness.
>
>> I would like to make it clear to everyone commenting that the TC has not
>> yet approved a formal 60-day Public Review of the specification; the
>> approximate date posted in the call for requirements for "ODF-Next" was
>> late April. At that point in time the TC will be required to log all
>> comments received along with their resolution before proceeding to the
>> next approval level. That said, OASIS encourages feedback at any stage
>> of a specification's lifecycle; early feedback is typically much easier
>> to react to than that provided late in the game.
>
> You say that the "at that point" (i.e. late April) the TC will be required
> to log all comments for ODF-Next. Yet the call document* speaks of
> gathering requirements "now" with an aim of having a report ready 1 May.
>
> Is it that requirements are not required to be logged but comments are?
> That seems a little like formalizing discussion on details but not on the
> broad strokes.
>
Requirements are being logged.
Cheers
Bob
> Cheers
> Rick Jelliffe
>
> * http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/tc-announce/200902/msg00007.html
>
> --
> This publicly archived list offers a means to provide input to the
> OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) TC.
>
> In order to verify user consent to the Feedback License terms and
> to minimize spam in the list archive, subscription is required
> before posting.
>
> Subscribe:
> Unsubscribe:
> List help:
> List archive: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office-comment/
> Feedback License: http://www.oasis-open.org/who/ipr/feedback_license.pdf
> List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
> Committee: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=office
>
>
