RE: [office] (OASIS Issue Tracker) Commented: (OFFICE-1700) Editor Note: Section18.258 style:font-charset

[robert_weir@us.ibm.com]

"Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote on 06/16/2009 
11:57:25 PM:
> 
> OK, I think I get it, although I think I liked the way public comments 
were
> moved along in blocks before, where if anything received comment it was 
held
> out for more discussion.
> 

We could certainly emulate something like this.  For example, we could 
have a comment convention, where if a TC member adds a comment of 
"HOLD-FOR-DISCUSSION" then we know to bring things up in the meetings. 
Just something easy that we can search for.  I'm not adverse to that, 
provided it is used sensibly.

> The current informal scheme has it be difficult to know what the status 
of
> anything is.  It doesn't seem to take advantage of the change control 
and
> tracking that is part of JIRA's value.  So be it.
>

Where is the difficulty?  You find all the issues you entered, at least 
since joining the TC, by searching for your name.  Earlier ones are found 
by search for your email address.  Status of everything is listed right in 
JIRA.  Every issue has a unique ID, and you can click the "watch it" link 
to subscribe to all change notifications for that issue.  How can you not 
know what the status of any particular issue is?
 
>  - Dennis
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: robert_weir@us.ibm.com [mailto:robert_weir@us.ibm.com] 
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200906/msg00302.html
> Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 00:38
> To: office@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [office] (OASIS Issue Tracker) Commented: (OFFICE-1700) 
Editor
> Note: Section 18.258 style:font-charset
> 
> "Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote on 06/16/2009 
> 02:37:26 AM:
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200906/msg00300.html
> 
> > RE: [office] (OASIS Issue Tracker) Commented: (OFFICE-1700) Editor 
> > Note: Section 18.258 style:font-charset
> > 
> > Got it!  Michael says use resolved to mean there is a proposed 
> > resolution satisfactory to the proposer.  But notice that the only 
> > available next state is applied and that means the "resolved" 
> > proposal is implemented.
> > 
> 
> That is my understanding as well.
> 
> > So when does the TC get to have a say?
> > 
> 
> You can have a say whenever you want, adding a comment to the JIRA 
issue, 
> sending a note to the list, requesting discussion on the agenda, etc. 
> However we are not required to discuss and vote on every single JIRA 
issue 
> individually.
> 
> > Apparently we have to catch it in the next vote on making the draft 
> > into a cd, which is an up-down thing on the whole draft. 
> > 
> 
> 
> Remember, before JIRA we did not discuss and vote on every change to the 

> standard invidually.  Why should it be different now that we have JIRA? 
> JIRA helps us track the comments better.  But it doesn't change the TC's 

> draft approval process.
> 
> In any case, you can catch and report errors or disagreements or similar 

> whenever you want.  You don't need to wait for the CD. 
> 
> I wouldn't read too much into JIRA's terms "resolved" and "applied". 
> Certainly "applied" means only that the draft has been amended to 
resolve 
> the issue according to the stated resolution.  It does not mean that the 

> change was approved by the TC. 
> 
> Since most issues are not controversial, this is fine in most case.  But 

> if a particular issue requires more discussion, then please bring that 
up 
> on the list or request discussion on an agenda. 
> 
> The alternative would be to discuss and vote on every issue.  If a large 

> portion of the issues were controversial then that might be the better 
> approach.  But given the comment distribution we have today, this is 
best 
> handle on an exception basis.
> 
> 
> > I will stop before I say something really rude about this.
> > 
> 
> Probably a good idea.
> 
> -Rob
> 
> [ ... ]
>