OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

tgf message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [tgf] Comment on TGF-Primer Public Review Draft 02 - Document formatting and section numbering


Sorry, I dodged the question didn't I.  

What I meant by that is that purely formatting changes generally would, under the current regime, trigger a new review cycle - if those formatting changes were being requested to the content that the TC had approved. This is another example of the situation where a seemingly trivial change would nevertheless cause another round of review. 

We are in the clear in this case though because you haven't asked me to change what the TC approved, just get it right in its publication. 

/chet 

On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Peter F Brown <peter@peterfbrown.com> wrote:

Thanks Chet, that’s great – do you agree in any case, that purely formatting changes, if needed, do not constitute a revision that would require a new cycle of review?

Cheers,

Peter

 

Peter F Brown

Independent Consultant

www.peterfbrown.com

P.O. Box 49719, Los Angeles, CA 90049, USA

Tel: +1.310.694.2278

 

From: tgf@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:tgf@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Chet Ensign
Sent: Monday, 12 December, 2011 12:47
To: Peter F Brown
Cc: TGF TC List
Subject: Re: [tgf] Comment on TGF-Primer Public Review Draft 02 - Document formatting and section numbering

 

Hi Peter - 

I will look at the files and see if I can determine where the discrepancy came from. 

 

/chet

On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 3:40 PM, Peter F Brown <peter@peterfbrown.com> wrote:

Hi,

The formatting and section numbering in the document published by OASIS is different from the document submitted for publication

Just a small reserve that should not lead to a further public review: spurious, incorrectly nested and ultimately misleading numbering has been added throughout the document.

Either the numbering system introduced (by whom?) should be consistent with the document’s intended structure; or should be removed. It was not in the deliverable approved by the TC.

 

Regards,

Peter

 

 

 

Peter F Brown

Independent Consultant

Using Information Technologies to Empower and Transform

 

www.peterfbrown.com

P.O. Box 49719, Los Angeles, CA 90049, USA

Tel: +1.310.694.2278

Member of:

Follow me:

 

 



 

--

/chet 
----------------
Chet Ensign
Director of Standards Development and TC Administration 
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society
http://www.oasis-open.org

Primary: +1 973-378-3472
Mobile: +1 201-341-1393

Follow OASIS on:
LinkedIn:    http://linkd.in/OASISopen
Twitter:        http://twitter.com/OASISopen
Facebook:  http://facebook.com/oasis.open




--

/chet 
----------------
Chet Ensign
Director of Standards Development and TC Administration 
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society
http://www.oasis-open.org

Primary: +1 973-378-3472
Mobile: +1 201-341-1393

Follow OASIS on:
LinkedIn:    http://linkd.in/OASISopen
Twitter:        http://twitter.com/OASISopen
Facebook:  http://facebook.com/oasis.open



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]