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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

chairs message

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

Subject: Re: [chairs] Re: Chairs: Requesting your feedback on comment resolution logs


On 04/26/2012 02:52 PM, Chet Ensign wrote:
First of all, thank you for the feedback thus far. This has been very
helpful to me. I take the following key points from this discussion:

- Keep it simple

True but that should be for those making comments as well as the TCs.

For example:

The Draft Review System provides a simple web-based interface that allows users to provide their comments online, thus reducing the need for costly transcription of comments received via letter or email. The draft document is displayed to users, divided into sections that can each be commented on individually. Comments automatically reference the section of document on which they were made.

Can any of the options you offer below:

1) provide comments directly *in* the draft document

2) automatically reference the section of the document where they are made

3) avoid transcription of comments

4) Not listed above but changes to the draft are made directly in the document where the comments occur.


Imagine #4 for tracking the disposition of comments. (An OASIS requirement by the way.)

Moreover, the Draft Review System:

The Draft Standards Review System reduces the cost and complexity of managing public and private comment on draft standards and specifications. Standards organizations need to gather feedback on draft standards and draft specifications, from the public and from specific groups. This widens participation in standards creation, increases the quality of the final documents, and helps identify the users with an interest in that document.

Public and private comments, widening participation in the standards process, etc.

Is this vapour ware?

Is this smoke and mirrors?

No! BSI (British Standards Institute) has had this software in operation for *years.*

OASIS would have to have "standards" for work at OASIS but then that should not be odd for a standards organization.

It is unseemly for our TCs to expect other people to follow "standards," when they follow none of their own.

Anyone who wants further documentation can write to me off-list or on.

Hope you are having a great day!


PS: I freely admit that I will be among the first to grumble and complain about changes or requirements I don't like. But, I want an OASIS that follows standards to produce high-quality standards and uses the best technology available to do so. That starts with a Board that expects excellence and accepts nothing less.


Patrick Durusau
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)
OASIS Technical Advisory Board (TAB) - member

Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net
Homepage: http://www.durusau.net
Twitter: patrickDurusau

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