Re: [office-requirements] Draft text for call for proposals

[robert_weir@us.ibm.com]

Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net> wrote on 01/13/2009 02:34:29 PM:

> 
> Just a quick observation, more detailed comments will follow in a day or 
so.
> 
> I assume that the "report" will probably not detail proposals that were 
> not accepted.
> 

The TC is chartered to collect, categorize and prioritize the submitted 
proposals, but it is asked to report on a "recommended set of work items 
for ODF-Next".  So we're not obliged to report all submitted proposals. 
But if we opt to, and it may be a good idea, we could certainly have an 
annex called "Other Proposals" or something to record the remaining ideas.

> Shouldn't we say something about a comprehensive listing aside from the 
> "report?"
> 

We could mention, aside from the above possibility of an annex, that 
proposals submitted to the public comment list are permanently archived, 
and we could give the URL to the mailing list archive.

> BTW, how far back does our treatment of suggestions go for ODF-Next?
> 

We have a complete record of ODF public comment submissions, from January 
2004 to the present.  The comments after the close of the ODF 1.0 public 
review until July 2008 have been transcribed into a spreadsheet and have 
already been classified as whether they indicate a proposal, a defect 
report, etc.  I intend to update that spreadsheet to the present.  So it 
should be easy to extract all submitted proposals since July 2005. 
Comments before then were formally disposed as part of the ODF 1.0 public 
review.  But we should probably glance over those to extract any proposals 
have not been already included in ODF 1.1 or ODF 1.2.

But we probably don't want to go into that level of detail in the note.


> I would jazz up the lead in a bit. Something like: "Look beyond the four 

> corners of documents formats! Help the ODF TC take "ODF-Next" to a 
> higher stage of document evolution. Be creative, be suggestive, often. 
> The only limits on our vision are our own."
> 
> Yes, I am aware that the first sentence is meaningless. Still, it sounds 

> like it could mean something. ;-)
> 

OK.  I like that direction. 


> I really do think that with the foundation we will have with ODF 1.2, 
> that some truly unusual things, things we don't presently imagine, will 
> become possible.
> 
> Hope you are having a great day!
> 
> Patrick
> 
> robert_weir@us.ibm.com wrote:
> > Here is a first stab at a draft message.  Please be brutal with 
feedback.
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> > ---------------------------------------
> >
> > The OASIS ODF TC has recently finalized the approval of technical 
> > proposals which will be included in ODF 1.2.  After these proposals 
are 
> > integrated into the ODF 1.2 draft, and remaining editorial tasks are 
> > completed, the draft specification will be sent on for a required 
60-day 
> > Public Review, and then finally onto a ballot for approval as an OASIS 

> > Standard. 
> >
> > Concurrent with these final stages of ODF 1.2 work -- which may take 
> > several months -- the ODF TC wishes to start a public conversation 
related 
> > to the technical contents of "ODF-Next", the provisional name for the 
next 
> > major version of ODF.   The ODF TC has created a subcommittee, the ODF 

> > Requirements Subcommittee, chaired by Bob Jolliffe (email address 
here), 
> > in order to gather, categorize and prioritize proposals for ODF-Next, 
and 
> > to report back tot he ODF TC with recommendations.  The target for 
this 
> > report is May 1st, 2009.
> >
> > We wish to now start gathering proposals, from TC members, from the 
OASIS 
> > community, from ODF implementors, government, academia, and from the 
> > public at large.  What features should be added?  What capabilities do 
we 
> > need?  Where do we want to take ODF next?  We want you to think 
broadly 
> > and boldly on where we can take this standard in the next major 
revision.
> >
> > Some things to keep in mind:
> >
> > 1) ODF is a standard for a document format.  It is not a standard for 
a 
> > word processor or spreadsheet application.  So proposals will need to 
> > touch upon items that are reflected in the stored document.  Requests 
to 
> > change the UI of an application, or make it print faster, are examples 
of 
> > things that are out of scope.
> >
> > 2) The more detail you can provide in the proposal, the better.  If a 
> > specific change is requested, please give section references relative 
to 
> > the latest ODF 1.2 Committee Draft (insert URL here).
> >
> > 3) All proposals will need to be submitted in accordance with OASIS 
IPR 
> > Policy to the ODF TC's public comment list.  Information on joining 
this 
> > list can be found here (insert URL here).  Please also indicate 
"ODF-Next" 
> > as part of the subject line of your post.
> >
> > 4) All proposals previously submitted to the ODF TC's public comment 
list 
> > will automatically be considered for ODF-Next.  So there is no need to 

> > resubmit an idea if it was already previously submitted.
> >
> > 5) For inclusion in the ODF-Next report, proposals must be received by 

> > March 31st, 2009.
> >
> >
> > We welcome and look forward to your contributions !
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> > generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php 

> >
> >
> > 
> 
> -- 
> Patrick Durusau
> patrick@durusau.net
> Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34
> Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps)
> Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
> Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php 
>