Fwd: ODF Next Workshop (plus) for fall 2011 Netherlands

[Louis Suárez-Potts <luispo@gmail.com>]

Hi all,
Explanation for duplication, if any:

Michiel asked me to forward this note to the full list of lists working on ODF.

-louis


Begin forwarded message:

> From: Michiel Leenaars <michiel@nlnet.nl>
> Date: 18 May 2011 3:29:31 EDT
> To: Louis Suárez-Potts <luispo@gmail.com>
> Cc: odf-adoption <odf-adoption@lists.oasis-open.org>, odf-interop-tech@lists.oasis-open.org, office@lists.oasis-open.org, Arthur Bujis <arthur@artietee.nl>
> Subject: Re: ODF Next Workshop (plus) for fall 2011 Netherlands
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> 
> I think the proposed meeting is an excellent idea and should take place
> sooner than later. There are so many developments that we've seen
> recently, and so many lessons learnt. With the long awaited arrival of
> ODF 1.2 we have reached a major milestone for interoperability for
> office applications. The ODF TC within OASIS has worked for over four
> years on this major new version of the specification, with many new
> features. Vendors have almost unanimously embraced the new version, and
> rightly so. In some cases vendors were so eagerly awaiting the new
> features that they've been producing ODF 'pre'-1.2 documents in
> production environments for a number of years already. Others were
> patiently withholding from implementation whatsoever of any upcoming ODF
> 1.2 feature in their solutions until now, even at the plugin level,
> because the standard was not officially published yet.
> 
> That difference in timing does raise questions. One very large vendor of
> packaged productivity software has a basic release cycle of three years,
> another releases a new version every six months, and yet another
> community releases a fresh version of its open source product every
> month. With the rise of online services it is easy to see that even
> faster updates are likely to become more common. So how does the release
> cycle of the standard fit in? Now that the huge task of finishing ODF
> 1.2 is done, and we have gone through three iterations of producing a
> new version of the standard, the time has come to look back on the
> procedural side of things. Are there things we could improve upon, to
> make the standardisation effort as effective and structured as possible?
> 
> - From the user side, it is easy to see the case for change. OpenDocument
> Format is a large specification by almost any measure, certainly when
> you compare it to standards like XML, XHTML or SVG. There are even more
> bulky standards, no doubt, but if you look at the success rate of
> adoption of such standards then it would seem wise to avoid their fate.
> It is significant that the ODF TC has had to put a two year feature
> freeze on its work. Each new feature that becomes part of the standard,
> adds to the weight of its future maintenance. So if we are looking for
> effiency and innovation, the answer surely cannot lie in creating
> regular snapshots of a ballooning specification - besides the very
> significant interoperability cost it would have if there would not only
> be 'official' versions of the standard but a number of preliminary
> versions appearing in production.
> 
> If we look at best practices established by the internet and web
> standard setting organisation, it is clear that we should try to
> modularize into more easily manageable chunks - each with their own
> natural lifecycle. Even though development of HTML5 is moving at another
> pace than XHTML2, both have no problem to rely on CSS - which has a
> completely independent time path. While DNSSEC is essential for the
> security of the internet, we don't wait for implementation of IPv6
> because of it.
> 
> There is no overlap between the specification of OpenFormula, 3D
> objects, packaging and text styles or change tracking.
> 
> We should discuss face to face where we want this to go from here. IMHO
> modularity is essential to the future of ODF, and so is managing the
> lifecycle of each of its components. While some of these technology
> domains are seemingly unique to ODF - such as track changes,
> openformula, table of contents or an index - many parts are not unique
> at all. For instance, with the rise of vastly mature 2D and 3D languages
> like WebGL ubuquitously implemented in many different products it seems
> obvious that ODF will deprecate its own 2D and 3D formats in favor of
> that. In fact, the styling capabilities of CSS surpass those of ODF -
> and apart from being SGML there is no good reason to not move to them.
> SVG is overshadowing its ODG counterpart in many ways because of its
> ubiquity outside of office applications. Similarly, the OpenDocument
> database format may face competition from developments elsewhere.
> 
> At any rate it is clear to me that the answer lies not in creating
> regular snapshots of such a large specification, that would have a
> significant interoperability cost.
> 
> Imagine the OpenDocument standard as a buffet dinner, where we agree on
> common ingredients as our basic primitives. Every application takes what
> he or she needs, which makes perfect sense: applications don't have to
> be the same to interoperate. If you build a collaborative text editor,
> you only need a subset of the whole standard - you have no need for
> database fields, transitions or presentation master pages. The same
> would go for a spreadsheet for cell phones, or a presentation tool in
> the browser. Nobody expects a database editor to also render beautiful
> 3D graphics. All a user expects is for shared technology where possible.
> Having a two year feature freeze so that all of these components
> progress in closed formation to ultimately blend into one vast standard
> twice a decade is just not the way to go.
> 
> So, to summarize, I think we are at a crossroads and have many good
> reasons to change our course. And I'd rather have this workshop sooner
> than later. I look forward to discussing this with you all tomorrow.
> 
> Best,
> Michiel
> 
> On 05/18/11 16:14, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
>> During the ODF TC call today, Steve Pemberton proposed a workshop on ODF Next for this fall, to be held in Amsterdam and for a more general audience. He volunteered to help organize it.
>> 
>> ** Conference call this week:  If possible, let's have a conference call later this week to discuss the proposals below.
>> 
>> WHEN: THURSDAY, 15:00 UTC
>> 
>> Or. so. My reason for sooner than later has to do with the need to plan the event—surely more than Steve envisioned!—and to act initially, at least, before the US Memorial Day holiday at the end of May.
>> 
>> 
>> **Proposal**
>> 
>> Steve's proposal was met with considerable interest and zero disapproval. It was proposed further that the relevant ODF TCs (Adoption, in particular) be enmeshed in discussions on this—as well, to bring in Michiel and Arthur, also of the Netherlands. Michiel had previously indicated that his group was organizing a plugfest for late October.
>> 
>> I would like to propose a conference call to plan this event. The issues are:
>> 
>> * Exactly when? There are a few issues, such as the LibreOffice meeting, in Paris, that will have a section focused on ODF. When we previously proposed an ODF 5th anniversary conference—also to work with Michiel's plugfest—LibreOffice objected, as the timing, LibreOffice believed, would distract from their event. However, it was also argued that it's better to have an ODF event that is not branded at all by one vendor or project but utterly neutral, and the Netherlands plugfest, and now workshop proposal, satisfies that desire.
>> 
>> I would thus propose this, if possible, for sometime in mid-September or even a little later (OpenWorld Forum, a popular event also in Paris, is 22-24 September.)
>> 
>> * Audience? Steve suggested both technical and not, and I would agree. I think we need to achieve a couple of things, besides the important one of working on ODF Next: persuading non-developers that there is and will continue to be a relevance to ODF, and that it is something to which they ought to contribute resources, as well as attention.
>> 
>> * Duration? I would suggest three days. One day for technical workshops (or 1.5 days, perhaps); the remainder for more general discussions on ODF Next, implementations (absolutely unprejudiced representation of vendor's wares), and related technologies and opportunities gained by using ODF.
>> 
>> * Processes: Patrick D. suggested formalizing the process of paper submission Oasis-wide, and it would affect (positively) this event. We are considering, I believe, inviting submissions and participation from non-Oasis members as well as members. 
>> 
>> * Funding: I think we may have the opportunity of working with established corporate sponsors and supporters of ODF, but also with the national government and even, plausibly, with EU gov't. 
>> 
>> I would also like to see if can invite more than Oasis members to the planning of this, and that means Basil's UK group, as well as others. (They may use plugtest organizers list.)
>> 
>> 
>> I'm sure I've a) forgotten to include key persons and b) key data; please don't hesitate to fill in the lacunae.
>> 
>> -louis
>> 
>> ----
>> 
>> Louis Suarez-Potts, PhD
>> Community Manager
>> Chair, Community Council
>> OpenOffice.org
>> 
>> Time Zone, −0400 UTC
>> +1.416.531.9513 (landline)
>> +1.416.625.3843 (mobile)
>> 
>> AIM: luispo@mac.com
>> GTalk: luispo@gmail.com
>> Skype: louisiam
>> Jabber: luispo@jabber.org
>> Blog: http://ooo-speak.blogspot.com/
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (FreeBSD)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
> 
> iEYEARECAAYFAk3UHhsACgkQPPKB2FVlk19UZgCfUs5iSyQZu7meeTqYHZ0NN3s5
> zYkAnAtJUXHORzwyliLSmpv/+gnSCENx
> =I8SS
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----