Re: [office-metadata] Groups - ODF-Metadata-Proposal-22August2007 (07-08-22-ODF-Metadata-Proposal.odt) uploaded

[marbux <marbux@gmail.com>]

On 8/22/07, Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net> wrote:

Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
> patrick@durusau.net wrote:
>
>> After much hard work by all concerned I am pleased to announce the final
>> version of the Metadata Proposal has now been filed!
>
> And what happened to my request that people look into my suggestion
> for the generic field classes and properties?
>
I and I assume others are going to take it up with an eye towards asking
the TC to incorporate it into the proposal.

What we needed today was some final action by the SC so we can move it
forward in the TC.

Where anything that sounds like an interoperability requirement gets gutted.
 

No slight intended.
> Or more generally, how are we going to manage things going forward in
> terms of encouraging standardization of implementation for particular
> use cases (like two that are on the plate now: citations and license
> information)?
>
Personally I would like to see the ODF TC publish "best practices" for
metadata and when some particular "best practice" becomes wide spread,
then to fold it into the standard. That would not restrict
experimentation and yet at the same time allow the TC to incorporate
what has been found to be popular among particular user communities.

Ah, yes. Experimentation and best practices, the answer to all interop proposals on this TC. In other words, the same old "let the market decide" theme always espoused by monopolists and their allies.

But will it be a good enough excuse to get ODF 1.2 through ISO? See e.g.,

These Directives shall be complied with in all respects and no deviations can be made without the consent of the Secretaries-General.

...

A purpose of IT standardization is to ensure that products available in the marketplace have characteristics of interoperability, portability and cultural and linguistic adaptability. Therefore, standards which are developed shall reflect the requirements of the following Common Strategic Characteristics:

• Interoperability;
  
• Portability;
  
• Cultural and linguistic adaptability.

ISO/IEC JTC 1 Directives, 5th Ed., v. 3.0, pg. 11 (PDF).
 

Standards designed to facilitate interoperability need to specify clearly and unambiguously the conformity requirements that are essential to achieve the interoperability. Complexity and the number of options should be kept to a minimum and the implementability of the standards should be demonstrable. Verification of conformity to those standards should then give a high degree of confidence in the interoperability of IT systems using those standards. ...

Ibid, pg. 145.

Where are "the conformity requirements that are essential to achieve the interoperability" in this situation, Patrick?

Best regards,

Marbux

Hope you are having a great day!

Patrick
> Bruce
>
>

--
Patrick Durusau
patrick@durusau.net
Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34
Acting Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps)
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)
Co-Editor, OpenDocument Format (OASIS, ISO/IEC 26300)