"Dave Pawson" <>
wrote on 07/01/2008 12:54:54 PM:
>
>
> > It is common language in OASIS TC charters to say something like
"The TC
> > will develop and maintain XXX", where "maintain"
implies future updates,
> > revisions, etc.
>
> Is that another unwritten Oasis rule that you're hiding Rob?
> Custom and practice or some such?
>
>
> I'd like to hear your argument for why the proposed OIIC TC
> > should be an exception to that practice.
>
> Until you mentioned it I didn't know of that practice.
>
I know. After repeated requests you still refuse
to look at existing OASIS TC charters to get a sense of the custom.
>
> Remember, scope does not oblige us
> > to work on "all versions of ODF ad infinitum into
the future", but it does
> > permit the TC to choose to work on the interoperability of any
ODF release
> > they decide to. What is your objection to letting the people
who will do
> > the work, decide which versions of ODF are most relevant to that
work?
>
> It's not a clear work package without a defined version of ODF on
> which to work.
>
Wrong. Without specifying a version, the scope
is clearly defined as permitting work on any ODF version. There is
a difference between undefined and broadly defined.
>
>
> >
> > In general I'd advise discussion participants to focus on things
that they
> > want added to the charter which they personally would participate
in the
> > development of.
>
> Another c&p?
>
No. In fact the custom is for 5 OASIS members
to propose a TC charter directly, after private consultations among themselves.
The use of a discussion list, as we are doing now, and having public
participation, is far less common.
-Rob
