OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

office message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Making Progress on Public Comments and Errata

I though this might come up under the review of public comments, but we went into review of some additional items.

I would like to advance the handling of comments and errata, starting in the current holiday window.  My goal is to have something to show for our efforts on or before the meeting in Okinawa at the end of January, in case that matters.

Here is my current understanding and some alternatives that I see available. 

I am now in Alternative A mode.  Let me know if and when I should switch over to Alternative B.  I will create action items for tracking at that time.

 - Dennis

Dennis E. Hamilton
NuovoDoc: Design for Document System Interoperability 
mailto:Dennis.Hamilton@acm.org | gsm:+1-206.779.9430 
http://NuovoDoc.com http://ODMA.info/dev/ http://nfoWorks.org 


As far as I know, the latest Public Comment document is version 11 of 2008-11-28:

I have been avoiding making any further additions or changes to this document pending:

a. Any updates from Michael as the result of the items discussed in the 2008-12-15 call

b. Any additions from Rob for the remaining queue of public comments.

What I would like to do is reorganize the columns a little so that we can more easily filter on the source of comments (e.g., ones from SC34 defect reports, ones from other sources).


I won't do that until others have entered their material, so that it can be done by cut and paste into a table of the same shape as the current one.


I will immediately claim check-out of the document and add the column for singling out SC34 defect-report items and a column for indicating which errata, if any, has treatment of the item.  I can think of other columns (e.g., checked against regression in 1.2, etc.), but I can wait on that.

I will check that back in quickly and any further modifications should be made against that form.  (I might not even put anything into the new columns, just have them now available on the form so new rows will provide for them.)


After Alternative B is completed, I will start adding the items from the latest defect report using a copy (but holding no check-out).  When I have those ready, I will ask for check-out and then add those items to the document.  This will have comments be no longer chronological, although there will still be a record of them.  For those items in the latest defect report that are duplicates of ones individually submitted to us by Murata, I will use the item that is already on our list.


After Alternative B+C is complete, I propose to start capturing comments in two ways:  New public comments go onto the register immediately.  The older public comments are recovered starting with July, 2008 following the 2008-07-01 items already captured (or following any later one that Rob puts on the document).


Go through the public-comment list and extract any ones from Murata and other Asian sources from 2008-07-01 to the time of the second SC34 defect report.  Then record any additional SC34 defect items that are not covered by those direct public comments.  Then the Alternative B+C+D process can continue.  

[end of note]

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]