Re: [office-collab] Straw Poll re delay to consensus report to include MCT

[Svante Schubert <svante.schubert@gmail.com>]

On 03.02.2012 21:21, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> Svante, this is too much like a drive-by shooting.  
Dennis, in relation to the current progress it is for sure.
> I suggest that time is better spent solidifying technical content for proposals.
I agree and stated before I would love to discuss technical questions
ASAP on a call. But until now there was not a single technical question
on the list.
>
> And everyone needs to decide the full issue about how implementations are expected to migrate.  Will 1.3 eliminate the CT, such as it is, in ODF 1.0/1.1/1.2 or will it build repairs on it as well as it can and leave dramatic changes for ODF 2.0?  How do implementations that confirm workability of revisions to CT in 1.3 Committee Drafts work in?  These are serious pragmatic issues.
A proposal adapting an existing ODF feature should always provide a
mapping from & to the last ODF version to guarantee interoperability to
existing ODF documents. If we stick to this rule, we might have a full
chain of transformations from ODF 1.2 to ODF XY.
> That's a policy question that needs to be dealt with and that one would then reconcile proposals within.
I do not see an unsolvable problem here.

- Svante
>
>  - Dennis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: office-collab@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:office-collab@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Svante Schubert
> Sent: Friday, February 03, 2012 12:08
> To: office-collab@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [office-collab] Straw Poll re delay to consensus report to include MCT
>
> With all due respect if this SC would be part of a profit (or at least result) oriented company, I fear we all have been fired a while ago.
>
>
> [ ... ]
>
>