Re: [chairs] Competing formats?

[Bob Freund <bob.freund@hitachisoftware.com>]

+1
On Apr 22, 2010, at 4:38 PM, Patrick Durusau wrote:

> Greetings!
> 
> We can continue the thread on which OASIS format should be used for OASIS work and the various benefits and advantages of each one.
> 
> But, I don't think that would be a very useful discussion, so let me suggest a change in emphasis.
> 
> What structure, leaving particular formats to one side, should OASIS standards have?
> 
> We already know they have a cover page and the last clause is a conformance clause, plus references, but what else?
> 
> The ISO guidelines run a number of pages on this subject.
> 
> If we can get a start on describing a common model for OASIS standards, then what any format has to do to support it should become obvious to those who support that format.
> 
> Does that sound like a more fruitful way forward?
> 
> Hope everyone is having a great day!
> 
> Patrick
> 
> -- 
> Patrick Durusau
> patrick@durusau.net
> Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34
> Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps)
> Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
> Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)
>

smime.p7s