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

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

cgmo-webcgm message

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


Subject: RE: [cgmo-webcgm] Proposed agenda for f2f meeting


Lofton, All,

That has been something that tilted me when reading the last quaterly report.

As stated, it is true that it is now in limbo. We have been very near to be able to deploy it, but each time it has been treated as a non prioritary item (most of the time by myself). Today, the status for me is that this has been more dealt with as a prototype and is therefore dificult to maintain.

My position on your proposal is therefore: kill it.
Why:
	- interoperability issue with CGM, that I have raised some 5 years ago have decreased a lot. I suspect that having users being more demanding and vendors highly involved in the development of the technology has contributed a lot to this. CGMOpen is added value and I appreciate the vendors involvement.
	- we are near now to the point where only one profile will exist (with some cascading profiles potentially). The technical evolution of it is mastered and as it is a profile for the web (and therefore a lot of people), it could be xepected it is implemented correctly and completly (which was the major blocking point before).
	- Having the profile in the W3C and OASIS world also allows people to know more about it and also to find places whre to discuss, claim and report about it. (as said in some last emails, maye we lack some educationnal cotents, as the CGM handbook).


On other item:
We are from time to time talking about cascading profiles (ATA, ASD, ...). I think the group should reach a consensus on that subject. Especially to work on a set of rules for what is allowed or not in a cascading profiles. You should say that this i writing a profile, but in my mind this is slightly different. Rules have to be set: does WebCGM allows to its cascading profiles allowing/dismissing primitives that are not allowed/allowed in the profile? Can cascading profiles extends a list of values for an attribute (e.g. compression modes). I think tha CGMOpen (as a vendor community) has to be very clear, because behind that is the implementation issue. For me this is no sense to allow in cascading profiles something that the vendors will never implement because it is cosly and addressing a nich community of users.
Idea: it could be a document stating for each profile item what can be done?



Franck.

-----Message d'origine-----
De : Lofton Henderson [mailto:lofton@rockynet.com]
Envoyé : mardi 7 août 2007 18:10
À : Cruikshank, David W; CGM Open WebCGM TC
Objet : Re: [cgmo-webcgm] Proposed agenda for f2f meeting


At 02:57 PM 8/3/2007 -0700, Cruikshank, David W wrote:
>Here's my proposal for an agenda for our f2f meeting in Seattle.
>
>Please review and give me any comments as far as additions or deletions.

Let's revisit our good old "Interop. Problem Tracking System".  I have been 
carrying this item forward, in quarterly reports, as "back burner, 
pending", for a couple years now (at least).

The last status:  we were ready to go, but needed a couple small 
corrections to user documentation pages.  We could never get those 
done.  It has now been in limbo for some years.

Therefore we should formally kill it, and take it off of our program of 
work.  Or else finish it and roll it out for the public (and a publicity, 
press-release opportunity).

-Lofton.



This mail has originated outside your organization, either from an external partner or the Global Internet.
Keep this in mind if you answer this message.



This e-mail is intended only for the above addressee. It may contain privileged information.
If you are not the addressee you must not copy, distribute, disclose or use any of the information in it. 
If you have received it in error please delete it and immediately notify the sender.
Security Notice: all e-mail, sent to or from this address, may be accessed by someone other than the recipient, for system management and security reasons. This access is controlled under Regulation of security reasons.
This access is controlled under Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, Lawful Business Practises.




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