[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [chairs] need your comments on DocMgmt system requirements
I ask that before we go too far down the path of selecting XML that we identify (reasonably priced) editors/conversion utilities that can handle large documents. The UDDI spec for example is 411 pages long (123K words / 901K characters including white spaces); it's been a challenge to use HTML editors and thus one of the reasons for sticking to MSWord for document editing and use of its native (though somewhat unsatisfactory) HTML conversion capability -- aside from the obvious need to have a means of supporting the TC's document revision needs. I believe that we should not consider selecting a document format (other than HTML and/or PDF for which there is ample support) until we've identified our list of requirements (e.g. large document and revision support) and evaluated tooling (editors and/or conversion utils) to support these. I'd certainly like the opportunity to try out recommended XML editors/utils before we convince ourselves of using or mandating XML for OASIS specs. Luc -----Original Message----- From: Drummond Reed [mailto:drummond.reed@cordance.net] Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 16:17 To: 'Rex Brooks'; karl.best@oasis-open.org; 'Chairs OASIS' Cc: 'lomas >> Jeff Lomas' Subject: RE: [chairs] need your comments on DocMgmt system requirements +1. I think it's a foregone conclusion there's no way to get consensus across all OASIS users on an editor. But if there were an open-standard interface/XML interchange format, and a reasonable variety of editors that did (or could be made to) support it, that should work. After all, this is an e-business collaboration standard we're discussing here ;-) =Drummond -----Original Message----- From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 4:48 PM To: karl.best@oasis-open.org; Chairs OASIS Cc: lomas >> Jeff Lomas Subject: Re: [chairs] need your comments on DocMgmt system requirements I would go for xml, if we can have a toolset that can do a roundtrip with Word. Ciao, Rex At 5:51 PM -0500 2/18/04, Karl F. Best wrote: >Excellent comments, everyone. Keep 'em coming. > >I see a consensus that we want a sandbox as a phase prior to checkin >and version control, and a suggestion to use wiki for the sandbox. >We will need to have access control too, to restrict this to the TC >members. > >I see a lot of pros-n-cons for using MSWord together with CVS in the >second phase, especially as it relates to change control. We're not >committed to CVS yet; that's just a popular suggestion. How would you >feel about a requirement to do all of your documents in HTML or XML? >i.e. no proprietary or binary formats. (Now there's a big can of worms >to open :-) I'm not making any threats; just wondering if that might be >a good way to go. Perhaps this would require OASIS providing tools for >the TCs to use; we'd have to ask some vendors for contributions. > >If we did use some text-based format (as above), would CVS provide us >with change logs? > >-Karl -- Rex Brooks GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison, Berkeley, CA, 94702 USA, Earth W3Address: http://www.starbourne.com Email: rexb@starbourne.com Tel: 510-849-2309 Fax: By Request
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]