[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [office-comment] CD01 -- 8.2.1 Referencing Table Cells
Rob hi
Thanks - sounds like that could work ... I'll draw Francis' attention to
this so he can factor it into his AHG3 planning ...
- Alex.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: robert_weir@us.ibm.com [mailto:robert_weir@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: 08 May 2009 14:35
> To: office-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [office-comment] CD01 -- 8.2.1 Referencing Table Cells
>
> "Alex Brown" <alexb@griffinbrown.co.uk> wrote on 05/08/2009 05:01:38
> AM:
>
> >
> > Will this fix be back-applied to ODF 1.1?
> >
> > In fact will all these minor-but-important wording faults ("must",
> > "similar to", etc.) be corrected for ODF 1.1? Or will it be
> > necessary for defect reports to come in from the JTC 1 side to
> > trigger errata/amendments for 1.1?
>
>
> We do not currently have a work item to create errata for ODF 1.1.
>
> Since there is no version of ODF 1.1 in JTC1, I'd suggest that we want
> something like this to occur:
>
> At some suitable cut-off date, JTC1 process an amendment to ISO/IEC
> 26300
> which includes material from the following:
>
> 1) Changes made in OASIS ODF 1.1 (accessibility fixes, etc.)
> 2) Changes made in OASIS ODF 1.0 Errata 01 (Murata-san's first defect
> report)
> 3) Changes made in OASIS ODF 1.0 Errata 02 (Murata-san's second defect
> report, plus possibly others)
> 4) Changes made in OASIS ODF 1.0 Errata 03 (Whatever else we need to
> address)
>
> Obviously, any OASIS Approved Errata which have been already converted
> into in approved Technical Corrigenda would not need to be
reconsidered
> in
> the amendment. But there is the distinct possibility that some
> Approved
> Errata will be unprocessed at the point when you decide to do the
> amendment. So you need to be prepared to handle it either way.
>
> This amended ODF 1.1 could then be adopted by OASIS as "ODF 1.1
(second
> edition)". It would be too much for us to process as Approved Errata,
> but
> we could submit it to an OASIS ballot for a "second edition".
>
> This is just a suggestion of a possible route. Frances and Patrick
> will
> need to work out the details.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
>
> --
> This publicly archived list offers a means to provide input to the
> OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) TC.
>
> In order to verify user consent to the Feedback License terms and
> to minimize spam in the list archive, subscription is required
> before posting.
>
> Subscribe: office-comment-subscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> Unsubscribe: office-comment-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> List help: office-comment-help@lists.oasis-open.org
> List archive: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office-comment/
> Feedback License: http://www.oasis-
> open.org/who/ipr/feedback_license.pdf
> List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
> Committee: http://www.oasis-
> open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=office
> -----Original Message-----
> From: robert_weir@us.ibm.com [mailto:robert_weir@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: 08 May 2009 14:35
> To: office-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [office-comment] CD01 -- 8.2.1 Referencing Table Cells
>
> "Alex Brown" <alexb@griffinbrown.co.uk> wrote on 05/08/2009 05:01:38
> AM:
>
> >
> > Will this fix be back-applied to ODF 1.1?
> >
> > In fact will all these minor-but-important wording faults ("must",
> > "similar to", etc.) be corrected for ODF 1.1? Or will it be
> > necessary for defect reports to come in from the JTC 1 side to
> > trigger errata/amendments for 1.1?
>
>
> We do not currently have a work item to create errata for ODF 1.1.
>
> Since there is no version of ODF 1.1 in JTC1, I'd suggest that we want
> something like this to occur:
>
> At some suitable cut-off date, JTC1 process an amendment to ISO/IEC
> 26300
> which includes material from the following:
>
> 1) Changes made in OASIS ODF 1.1 (accessibility fixes, etc.)
> 2) Changes made in OASIS ODF 1.0 Errata 01 (Murata-san's first defect
> report)
> 3) Changes made in OASIS ODF 1.0 Errata 02 (Murata-san's second defect
> report, plus possibly others)
> 4) Changes made in OASIS ODF 1.0 Errata 03 (Whatever else we need to
> address)
>
> Obviously, any OASIS Approved Errata which have been already converted
> into in approved Technical Corrigenda would not need to be
reconsidered
> in
> the amendment. But there is the distinct possibility that some
> Approved
> Errata will be unprocessed at the point when you decide to do the
> amendment. So you need to be prepared to handle it either way.
>
> This amended ODF 1.1 could then be adopted by OASIS as "ODF 1.1
(second
> edition)". It would be too much for us to process as Approved Errata,
> but
> we could submit it to an OASIS ballot for a "second edition".
>
> This is just a suggestion of a possible route. Frances and Patrick
> will
> need to work out the details.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
>
> --
> This publicly archived list offers a means to provide input to the
> OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) TC.
>
> In order to verify user consent to the Feedback License terms and
> to minimize spam in the list archive, subscription is required
> before posting.
>
> Subscribe: office-comment-subscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> Unsubscribe: office-comment-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> List help: office-comment-help@lists.oasis-open.org
> List archive: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office-comment/
> Feedback License: http://www.oasis-
> open.org/who/ipr/feedback_license.pdf
> List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
> Committee: http://www.oasis-
> open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=office
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]