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

[Robin LaFontaine <robin.lafontaine@deltaxml.com>]

Svante's collaboration work is a radically different approach from either of the current proposals (and this is based on the information that Svante has presented and referenced and several hours discussion with him - it is very interesting but very different). That is why I found it difficult to see as a 'compromise' between GCT and ECT. It is a compromise only in the sense of being generic like GCT and extending existing functionality with an emphasis on simplicity like ECT. Feedback on the questions in the conclusion of the report are also relevant as input to this so would not be wasted.

Although collaboration is in our ADC name, our brief was clear "The initial and highest priority for the Subcommittee will be change tracking." It may make sense to revisit this brief in the light of feedback and Svante's research, but that was what we were asked to do.

Robin

On 12/01/2012 17:40, Thorsten Behrens wrote:

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,

-- 
-- -----------------------------------------------------------------
Robin La Fontaine, Director, DeltaXML Ltd  "Experts in information change"
T: +44 1684 592 144  E: robin.lafontaine@deltaxml.com      
http://www.deltaxml.com      
Registered in England 02528681 Reg. Office: Monsell House, WR8 0QN, UK