Please read: ODF 1.2 process proposal

[Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg <Michael.Brauer@Sun.COM>]

Dear TC members,

as discussed, here is my proposal how to proceed with the completion of
ODF 1.2. The proposal is actually at the end of this mail. If you are
only interested in the proposal itself you can skip the introduction.

Before providing the proposal itself, I would like to provide some
details about the current status, and also some kind of outlook
regarding the development and schedule of future ODF versions which may
help to understand the proposal itself.


Introduction
------------

- When we started the work on ODF 1.2, we identified a few main topics
to work on. These were Formulas, Metadata, Presentation Tables, Data
Base Front End formats and I think also Digital Signatures. All these
are completed (with the exception of processing some feedback we
received and some pure editorial work).
- The last time we discussed the schedule for ODF 1.2 we were assuming
that ODF 1.2 gets an OASIS standard September 2008. We are at least 6
months behind that already (the public review and OASIS standard ballot
take 4 months at least), so it seems to be required to take some
action to not loose track of our schedule entirely.
- As of today we have 47 proposals in the Wiki. If we assume that we
need 10 minutes for each proposals for discussion and another 5 for a
ballot, and if we assume that we have 45 minutes in a TC call for
proposals available (what is far too optimistic), then it would take us
18 TC calls to process the proposals. That is about 5 months. If we add
the 4 months that are required as minimum for a public review and an
OASIS standard ballot, ODF 1.2 would be an OASIS standard in September
2009 earliest. Given that we have additional tasks on the agenda of the
TC calls, a more realistic date may be Spring 2010.
- The number of proposals we have approved for ODF 1.2 is about 80. The
number of open proposals therefore is more than the half of what we had
for ODF 1.2, and seems itself to be sufficient material for a next ODF
version.
- We have not planned a schedule for a post-ODF-1.2 version, but of
cause, we may agree a schedule for this version where we deliver it not
too far after ODF 1.2. That is in our hands. My proposal here would be
that we introduce a so called train model. In a train model we would
have fixed dates where we deliver specifications, and we would include
into these specifications what is ready by that date. We may for
instance decide to have committee drafts every three or six months,
which always should contain all proposals that have been agreed until
when. We may then decide for each of the committee drafts whether we
want to advance it to a committee specification, or even an OASIS
standard. We should discuss this separately. What is essential
for the discussion about the ODF 1.2 completion is only that proposals 
that don't get into ODF 1.2 are not lost. As soon as ODF 1.2 is 
complete, we can and should take any action that is required to get the 
remaining proposals into an ODF specification, too.

Proposal
--------

Based on this, I would like to ask all TC members to re-consider if
their proposals are essential for ODF 1.2. We may be capable of
discussing maybe 4 or 5 without further delaying ODF 1.2 (or taking
other actions as outlined below), but not 47. Some (informal) guideline
whether a proposal is essential may be whether it resolves an issue we
introduced with ODF 1.2. If that is the case, then the proposal may be
essential for ODF 1.2. If that is not the case, then the proposal still
may be important, but it may also be okay if it is included in the next
ODF version only.

When requesting that a proposal is considered for ODF 1.2, please
consider also that each proposal either means a delay in ODF 1.2, or
means that there is less time to discuss proposals, or that we need
additional calls, or that other proposals (either from yourself or other
TC members) cannot be considered. I don't want to propose at this stage
any rules how many proposals a TC member is allowed to request. But if
each TC member who has open proposals at the moments would not request
more than one, or two as a maximum, then this may result in a number of
proposals which we may be able to discuss and agree on in the next few
weeks.


Having all that said, here is what I would like to propose. This
proposal is based on the assumption that there are about 5 ODF 1.2
proposals remaining. If there are more, then we we need to take some
more actions as included in the proposal.

1. TC members can continue to make proposals according to our standing
rule, regardless whether these are for ODF 1.2 or a later version. That
is, these rules amend the proposal standing rule, but they do not
replace it.

2. Within TC calls, the discussion of proposals that are not for ODF 1.2
is deferred until all parts of the ODF 1.2 specification are submitted
for public review.

3. TC members can combine proposals for discussion and approval. These
may remain separate entries in the Wiki, but they would be treated like
a single proposal in the TC proposal process. This in particular means
that the total discussion time of item 5 applies to the combined
proposal, and not to the individual ones, and that there will be a
single vote for the combined proposal only.

4. TC members can indicate their wish to get a proposal included into
ODF 1.2 by sending an e-mail to the TC's mailing list. A formal proposal
must exist at this time. The proposal does not have to be complete by
that time.

*The latest date by which such request can be made is December, 10th.*

*The ODF 1.2 Wiki page is considered to be obsolete. Proposals must be
re-requested for inclusion in ODF 1.2 by e-mail.*

5. The total discussion time per proposal will be limited to 10 minutes.
That is, TC members can request one 10 minute discussion, but also, for
instance, two times a 5 minute discussion. TC members are encouraged to
discuss proposals on the mailing list in the first place.


6. *The last date by which a vote for a proposal can be requested is
January, the 7th.* Please note that according to our standing rule, the
proposal has to be discusses previously.

The following requirements must be met before a vote on the proposal can
be requested.
- The proposal contains the exact text that has to be added or changed
in the specification, including the affected sections.
- The proposal contains the requested schema changes, if necessary.
- The proposal is based on ODF 1.2 draft 7-11, or a later draft.
- A copy of the proposal does exist in the TC's document repository, or
on the TC's mailing list (this is required by the standing rule).
The TC shall not approve a proposal that does not meet these requirements.

7. *The last TC call in which votes regarding ODF 1.2 proposals are
conducted is January, the 12th 2009.*

8. If more than 5 proposals are requested for inclusion into ODF 1.2,
then the TC will decide on one or more of the following options in its
call on December, the 15th.
a) The number of proposals per TC member is limited to a to be decided
number.
b) The discussion time per proposal is further restricted.
c) Additional calls are scheduled.
d) The dates of items 5 and 6 are adapted.
e) It is agreed that none of the requested proposals is included into
ODF 1.2.

9. A ballot regarding these rules is conducted in the call on December,
the 8th. The rules may be amended by a TC vote on December, the 15th.

Best regards

Michael

-- 
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: Thomas Schroeder, Wolfgang Engels, Dr. Roland Boemer
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrates: Martin Haering