"Dennis E. Hamilton" <> wrote on 02/08/2009
03:03:26 PM:
>
> Rob,
>
> I don't dispute the need to tie together the conformance
interdependencies
> of the parts of the ODF 1.2 specification. I dispute the need to do
that
> now using normative pretend language appealing to other normative
pretend
> language that has not been written yet. I find this particular approach
to
> "bootstrapping" makes us appear to be careless (or worse), leaving us
with
> defects that we have to remember to watch over and deal with in future
> stages. I would rather not do that.
>
Dennis, this is a pre-draft. Drafts are incomplete and subject to change.
Nothing here is normative until the ODF TC approves the draft, we further
send it out for public comment, we further vote to approve it as a
Committee Specification, further vote to send it out for an OASIS ballot
and finally until OASIS approves it. We don't have a standard until all
of these steps are completed. One of these steps(sending for an OASIS
ballot) will require that 2/3 of the voting members in this TC approve the
Committee Specification and that no more than 1/4 of the voting members
disapprove it. So there will be ample opportunity for you and others to
cry "Halt" if you believe that something is not quite right in the final
product.
In particular I'd note that intra-part, inter-part as well as external
normative references will likely continue to be refined until ODF 1.2 is
ready for final approval. But that should not prevent us from moving
forward on the text of ODF 1.2, not even the parts of ODF 1.2 that depend
on these references. We're working asynchronously in the three parts. We
can't expect that they will always be in synch day-to-day. Obviously they
need to end up in synch at the end, but they won't always be that way
while we're working on a pre-draft.
Because of that, I'm not going to hold back a change to a pre-draft every
time someone notices a comma out of places. The possibility of things
getting out of whack between two parts is not cause for holding back
changes to those parts. My recommendation would be to start up a page on
the wiki, or maybe in JIRI, and make a reminder check list of things we
need to check for consistency at the end. I think Michael's list from
last week (external references, contributors, etc.) was a good start. We
could also put in additional items.
-Rob
