RE: [oic] Confused about the purpose of the Interop Profile

[Hanssens Bart <Bart.Hanssens@fedict.be>]

Well, I don't mind calling it a "best practice guide" if the members of this TC
would be more at ease with it, rather than Profile...

However, I do believe that we should use conformance clauses, since at
some practical level, implementers would want to test if their products is
in line with this interop "thingie". If not, we end up (*again*) running in circles
because there is no specification / thingie that is somehow "normative", or
has practical statements

In the ideal world, every implementer would have extremely detailed
implementers notes and one could derive a common denominator from
them + start discussing the differences an agree on a solution within this TC.
But this world isn't Utopia...

Personally, I prefer one big document (which would still leave a large degree
of freedom, since it - for instance - won't require implementers to support
tables, but if they do, they should do it like outlined in X, Y and Z), rather than
a bunch of separate "interoperability notes" (similar to CERT advisories).

If implementers would prefer the latter, fine with me...


In short, I want:

* a "thingie" that is practical
* fast to update
* one should be able to derive tests from it
* has some degree of authority (like community draft / spec)



Bart

PS: nice to have some discussion on this topic
________________________________________
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [dennis.hamilton@acm.org]
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2010 6:59 PM
To: 'Cherie Ekholm'
Cc: oic@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [oic] Confused about the purpose of the Interop Profile

+1

I believe the use of normative language, a defined conformance target and
conformance clauses in a document that is not expected to go past Committee
Specification is inappropriate and not in keeping with the scope and
identified deliverables of the OIC TC.

 - Dennis

PS: That's especially a concern when matters that are not now and not
expected to be in-scope for ODF itself are introduced (e.g., what someone
can or cannot do using a product UI, and how a feature is observable by and
governed by users at all).  Although those may be quite worthy of address in
some venue or another, it seems to me that we have to be very careful about
how OIC speaks on such matters, assuming it is appropriate to speak as OIC
at all under whatever the authority of the OASIS OIC TC is.

-----Original Message-----
From: Cherie Ekholm [mailto:cheriee@exchange.microsoft.com]
<http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oic/201003/msg00028.html>
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2010 09:54
To: Hanssens Bart; oic@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [oic] Confused about the purpose of the Interop Profile

I understand wanting to clarify the 1.1 standard - it often happens that
after a standard is released and implementers start using it that areas that
need clarification are exposed. I'd agree that this can be a detriment to
interoperability.

[ ... ]

If the idea here is to put out a best practices guide or best practices
profile as Bart says, why not call this just that?

Cherie


-----Original Message-----
From: Hanssens Bart [mailto:Bart.Hanssens@fedict.be]
<http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oic/201003/msg00027.html>
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2010 5:17 PM
To: Cherie Ekholm; oic@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [oic] Confused about the purpose of the Interop Profile



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php