Camilla, Patrick,
Camilla has raised some good points and I would support Patrick's
reply. I think it is quite likely that none of the current
proposals will be a perfect fit with requirements, but it would
certainly be useful to indicate where each falls short, as Camilla
suggests. At this stage it is not possible to predict whether or
not those shortcomings can be addressed, I think we will have to
see when we get there! The committee may want to allow some time
for issues to be addressed before they form their final
conclusion/recommendation.
In looking at requirements please do not forget the charter of the
subcommittee - that is what we were aiming for originally, though
there has been discussion about whether that was too ambitious.
But it was what the ADC SC were asked to do by the TC. Perhaps the
Select Committee will suggest a change in focus by a revision of
the charter, though I am not clear whether or not that is within
its remit.
Robin
On 26/04/2012 11:45, Patrick Durusau wrote:
Camilla,
On 04/26/2012 05:53 AM, C. Boemann wrote:
Hi
I was trying to find the scope of what it is the selection
committee is
supposed to do. As I understand it. We should look at the
proposal and select
one or possibly reject all and come up with something new. It 's
the last part
I'm wondering about.
You see, I already have quite some experience in this field, and
see shortfalls
in all 3 alternatives. That doesn't mean we can't select one or
the other if
need be, but it would be nice to know how much our hands are
tied.
Well, the TC has had "issues" with coming up with an exact scope
for either the SC or this "select" committee. ;-)
On the other hand if all we do is come up
with yet another proposal, then we
are just prolonging the process even further. So at the very
least we should
(also) come up with recommendations about the 3 proposals on the
table.
Not sure that I agree that another proposal of necessity prolongs
the process but do agree we need to address the three proposals on
the table.
Thinking that by addressing those proposals, any "other" proposal
would be an outgrowth of addressing shortcomings in those
proposals.
As far as our hands being "tied," I think that depends on how
creative we are as a select committee.
For example:
1) I am posting a call today for implementers of ODF to disclose
their experiences with customer demand for change tracking. Not
developer experience but customer demand. (Aside to implementers,
this isn't the crown jewels of how you do UIs, etc. Give it up.)
2) The select committee should evaluate the proposals in terms of
those customer requirements.
3) Where omissions or issues come up, the select committee should
recommend changes in proposals.
4) The select committee delivers its evaluation of the proposals,
along with either a recommendation on one with any proposed
changes or a new proposal.
I will post the call for customer requirements for change tracking
to the TC list.
Hope everyone is having a great week!
Patrick
best regards
Camilla Boemann
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: office-collab-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: office-collab-help@lists.oasis-open.org
--
-- -----------------------------------------------------------------
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
|