[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office-requirements] Requirements
2009/4/30 <robert_weir@us.ibm.com>: > Bob Jolliffe <bobjolliffe@gmail.com> wrote on 04/30/2009 04:26:45 AM: > >> >> It is the last day of April and it looks like the requirements TC will >> overrun the due date for the report of 1 May. >> > > That's fine. This report was intended to be a background thread activity > as we completed ODF 1.2. > > >> Nevertheless the number of requests on the public comment list are >> relatively few so I think I can prepare a draft of a report which I >> will share with the SC over the next few days. There are a number of >> issues which emerge in calls which have been "relegated" to >> requirements. I have not attended all calls but I am assuming that >> Rob's register of comments accurately captures these. Rob is this the >> case? >> >> There should also be an opportunity for TC members to make direct >> input, but perhaps this can be after the public contributed >> requirements have been summarized. Or should such be integrated into >> this document? I think that would be the start of a longer process. >> > > I can send you an extract from the spreadsheet of just the comments we > assigned for ODF-Next consideration. Thanks. I may have all these but would be good to double check. > I'm hoping TC members will also be vocal on possible themes and > capabilities for ODF-Next. I don't have a strong opinion on whether this > is two steps, or whether we gather all such feedback into the same initial > document. I suspect it almost inevitably has to be a two stage document. In fact probably more than two :-) > We should also make some statement on what degree of backwards > compatibility we will aim for with ODF-Next. I am already hearing from > one country's national standards committee (which I will not name) that > one large software publisher (whom I will not name) is arguing against the > adoption of ODF, for among other reasons, that the ODF TC has "started > work on ODF 2.0 which will not be backwards compatible." Fascinating! For the moment I'm just collecting the requirements. Thinking recursively, I suppose the degree of back compatibility desired is itself a requirement. Would be good to get some submissions on that one. Regards Bob > > -Rob > >> Regards >> Bob >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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 >> > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]