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


Robin,

Thanks!

The latest word is that an enhanced version of the BSI developed software is underway but it isn't public at this point.

I wasn't suggesting it as one among many non-standard choices a TC can make.

Rather I was thinking that it be used at the "standard" way to display comments/edits to drafts at OASIS.

TCs would be free to use spreadsheets, word processors, cigar boxes, note cards or any other means they care to use in collecting comments and editing their drafts.

However, the TC admin would accept only drafts that are submitted using the "standard" mechanism, along with comments, etc.

Believing in freedom of choice, the TCs could do double the work or they could choose to use the "standard" method.

TCs that want to use ODF (my first choice), DITA (other people's choice), Word, etc. could do so.

But we all (me included) would have to use the standard means to submit to the TC Admin.

A variation on "your mother doesn't work here." The TC Admin should not be cleaning up after adults who are supposed to be computer literate.

The public, remember the public?, get a standard way to comment on and to see their comments resolved.

Unless public comment and tracking of those comments isn't a goal. (I withhold comment on that issue.)

Hope you are having a great day!

Patrick

PS: Any governments or government agencies interested in e-government and transparency of the same should be interested in standard mechanisms for development and comment on standards. Use your voices as OASIS members to make that requirement known.

A crazy-quilt of methods for comments and tracking comments means a greater burden on the public. Your public.



On 05/03/2012 12:38 AM, Robin Cover wrote:
Here's something from W3C relevant to the email
thread "your feedback on comment resolution logs"
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/tab/201204/threads.html#00026
which partly fulfills requirements articulated by
by Patrick Durusau.  At the same time it put the
tune of Paul Simons into my brain "There Must Be
50 Ways to Leave Your (feedback on a spec)"

===============
Context
===============

I spotted a public "Call for Implementations" from
W3C [1], where "Call for Implementation" typically
implies advancement of a specification to the
status of Candidate Recommendation [2], where:

1. W3C believes the technical report is stable and
   appropriate for implementation (though it may
   still change based on implementation experience).

2. The Working Group is not required to show that
   a technical report has two independent and
   interoperable implementations, but...
   should include a report of present and expected
   implementations as part of the request.

3. The Working Group may identify specific features
   of the technical report as being "features at
   risk" ... [and] after gathering implementation
   experience, the Working Group may remove features
   from the technical report that were identified
   as being "at risk"...

4. An announced minimal duration of the "Call for
   Implementation" period is designed to allow time
   for comment, and should include the Working
   Group's estimate of the time expected to gather
   sufficient implementation data...

=================================================
Mechanics for feedback during the comment period
=================================================

In today's example, the "HTML5 Web Messaging"
spec is advanced to CR [3] and provides three
methods for public submission of comments, depending
upon user preferences:

* using the public Issue Tracking Service (Bugzilla),
  which supports tracking of comments made on the
  specification [4]

* entering Feedback Comments directly into the
  document being reviewed, in an embedded web form

* using email to send feedback to the public
  archived lists

Users who provide public comment can arrange
to receive notifications of changes to the
specification using either a Commit-Watchers
mailing list (complete source diffs) or
via the browsable version-control record of
all changes resulting from the feedback sent
during the "Call for Implementation" period.

Just FYI, as we are collecting ideas for future
improvements to the OASIS TCs' public comment
facility.

- Robin

[1] CFI text: http://www.w3.org/News/2012#entry-9438

[2] W3C Process Document, 7.4.3 Call for Implementations
http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#cfi
Candidate Recommendation
http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#RecsCR

[3] example: HTML5 Web Messaging
    W3C Candidate Recommendation 01 May 2012
http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/CR-webmessaging-20120501/

[4] W3C Bug / Issue Tracking Service
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/describecomponents.cgi




--
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)
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]