Rob, that is an excellent question/point. "Comment" needs a definition.
First let me say that I agree that tracking all comments, whenever received, is good practice. I would never try to dissuade a TC from doing that. Here, though, I am just trying to stick to the requirements set forth in the TC Process and find
a way to satisfy them.
Since the term is not formally defined in document -- perhaps it should be -- I have to derive a definition from a reading of the text itself.
The document describes the requirements for handling comments in three places: section 2.2, TC Formation where it deals with comments received during the call for comment period, 3.2 Public Review of a Committee Draft where it says that comments
must be acknowledged, etc. and 3.4.2 Public Review of a Candidate OASIS Standard where it again says acknowledge, track, etc.
Since in each case the requirements are set out in a section dealing with public reviews, my definition of comment is "a statement received in an email to a TC's -comment@ mailing list or, in the case of a TC member, in an email to the TC's primary
mailing list during an announced public review period that refers to the work product under review." That is admittedly a pretty narrow definition but it is what I infer from the text. I'm happy to consider other definitions.
So that means that a comment on ODF 1.2 that comes in during a public review of ODF 1.3 can be (not must be, just can be) left out of this process. It means that a generic comment, perhaps about the scope of the TC's work or a question about an
interpretation of something in another document, can be left out of this process. And it means that a comment provided by voice in a meeting or added by a member to the TC's JIRA project can be left out of this process. Of course, it also means that an incomprehensible
rant to the -comment@ mailing list does count and must be acknowledged and disposed of if it is about the document under review.
And, in the edge case that we had, for example, some drunken idiot spamming the comment list with gibberish about ODF 1.3, I'd work out a solution with you.
I am fine with the TC using his/her discretion on what qualifies and what doesn't.