Re: Errata process

[Mary McRae <mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org>]

Hi Norm,

I understand your concern; my response is intended merely to clarify the process. I can say that for as long as the Errata process has been in place (2007 I think) we have never had any issues raised other than the determination of what is a 'substantive change'. There are several (if not all) members of the Board Process Committee on this list. Feedback is always welcome - and tremendously appreciated.

Best regards,

Mary 



On Dec 13, 2010, at 11:46 AM, Norman Walsh wrote:

> Mary McRae <mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org> writes:
>> You can create as many draft errata as you like; they should be
>> cumulative. Once approved, the errata is noted on the standards page
>> along with the specification itself. You may also produce a merged
>> specification containing the errata so a user doesn't need to flip
>> between multiple documents.
> 
> Thanks, but that doesn't address my concern about the serial nature of
> the review process or the six-month rule.
> 
>                                        Be seeing you,
>                                          norm
> 
> -- 
> Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | The irrational is not necessarily
> http://nwalsh.com/            | unreasonable.--Sir Lewis Namier