[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office] Evalutions of my proposal wrt. the reqs
Hi Michael, wrt. a) samples. Sure. I'm working on this. Just wanted to provide the overview analysis in order to meet the Friday deadline. b) normative sample The proposal would work without the normative samples. However I think we should include them in the ODF spec in order to improve readability. Much like the Primer in W3C specs. c) We somehow need to come to a decision in the TC. I suggest to vote on each individual requirement. To be clear. When the TC votes against one of my requirements I'll stick to the majority. It was just important for me to raise my requirements. I'll continue working on the detailled analysis and post the updated docs as soon as I finished them. ~Florian >>> Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg <Michael.Brauer@Sun.COM> 03/23/07 5:08 PM >>> Hi Florian, first of all I would like to ask you to update the listreqanswer.odt document and to remove my name there, because I'm not among the authors of the proposal from Thomas, David and Oliver. Thanks. I further think it would be helpful if you provide examples for those requirements where you don't think that Thomas', David's and Oliver's meet them, and in particular for those where you come to other conclusions than Oliver. Since we have a couple of other topics for Monday, I would like to ask you to do so on the mailing list. I have a question regarding your proposal: It contains a couple of "normative examples". Are they part of the proposal in the meaning that they contain information necessary to implement ODF? Or could we remove them, and the proposal still would be complete? Regarding, the con call, I think we still should check whether we want to continue our discussion, or have a ballot on the proposals. Best regards Michael Florian Reuter wrote: > Hi, > > please find attached an overview of my evaluation results. I'm sorry that I was not able to prive an in depth > explanation in the given time. I'm happy to justy them in the next con call. > > I must admit that I find Oliver's reqs extremely hard to understand, since they mainly seem to be statements from his > proposal converted into requirements. > > I also attached a version of my proposal with header numbers in order to be able to reference to them. > > ~Florian -- Michael Brauer, Technical Architect Software Engineering StarOffice/OpenOffice.org Sun Microsystems GmbH Nagelsweg 55 D-20097 Hamburg, Germany michael.brauer@sun.com http://sun.com/staroffice +49 40 23646 500 http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS Sitz der Gesellschaft: Sun Microsystems GmbH, Sonnenallee 1, D-85551 Kirchheim-Heimstetten Amtsgericht Muenchen: HRB 161028 Geschaeftsfuehrer: Marcel Schneider, Wolfgang Engels, Dr. Roland Boemer Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrates: Martin Haering
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]