RE: [office-collab] WD04 comments [3 Thorsten]

[John Haug <johnhaug@exchange.microsoft.com>]

I agree with the previous sentiments that it would be useful to examine the motivations and support behind elements of the two proposals, as opposed to details of the proposals themselves, including comments from externals on their needs and wishes, even if done in the context of the existing GCT & ECT proposals.  I think that is one component of the larger task of determining "the goals and constraints, and the relative importance of each of them", which necessarily involves debating and answering (as best as able) "big questions" that establish broad goals, rough direction and fencing (as in, deciding what you're not going to do is an important part of deciding what you are going to do).  http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office-collab/201104/msg00070.html  Based on the results of that, I certainly endorse the notion of doing some collaborative *design* work to arrive at the right approach on the whole for the various interest groups - implementers or some types of apps, implementers of different types, end users, etc.

Perhaps in addition to being a "+1" reply, pulling together in this way a few of the sentiments expressed gives us a sketch for how the SC proceed next.  There's also been interest in the proposal Svante has discussed in the past, so taking a step back to debate high-level questions would let his ideas filter in without having to wait for a full-blown proposal document.  (Which would just leave us with three very different proposal docs rather than two.)

John

-----Original Message-----
From: office-collab@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:office-collab@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Thorsten Behrens
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 9:40 AM
To: Patrick Durusau
Cc: office-collab@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [office-collab] WD04 comments [3 Thorsten]

Patrick Durusau wrote:
> >Maybe. Still, the report is missing another, quite fundamental 
> >contribution to the sc, that provides answers to some of the posed 
> >questions.
> >
> 
> Sorry, that went by a little fast. Which "fundamental" contribution?
> 
> Or do you mean Svante's?
> 
Yes - it was said to somehow be a middle ground, plus addressing collaboration more cleanly, which is in the very name of the sc. :)

> I am anxious to see it but does that impact the priority we would 
> assign to change tracking issues?
> 
I would think so. Change tracking has been a festering issue for years, I would hate to waste people's time with something that may change substantially in a month or two.

Cheers,

-- 

Thorsten Behrens

SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg; GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)