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: RE: [office] Re: OFFICE-2608 and Errata CD04 Defects

"Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote on 03/30/2010 
02:44:04 PM:

> RE: [office] Re: OFFICE-2608 and Errata CD04 Defects
> PS: How does this square with ODF 1.1 already having been submitted, as 
> from OASIS to JTC1.

No problem there.  The agreement with JTC1 is that they maintain an ISO 
text that "technically equivalent" to the OASIS text.  They are not 
required to be verbatim duplicates.  That gives us a little flexibility. 
Since OASIS Errata do not change conformance, or make substantive changes, 
then the presence of absence of errata corrections do not change whether 
the texts are "technically equivalent". 

And remember, the text that is balloted is not necessarily the same as the 
text that is approved.  ISO in this respect is different than OASIS.  So 
they can, if they want, go out with a ballot that is exactly the delta 
between ISO/IEC 26300 and OASIS ODF 1.1.  Then, any additional changes 
that are necessary to restore corrections from COR1 and COR2 can be added 
after the ballot ends, via the comment resolution process after the 
ballot. This is a more expeditious approach than waiting for the DCOR's to 
finish processing. 

Let's take a hypothetical case.

Imagine ODF 1.1 has a spelling error.  It has my name as Wier rather than 

We fix that in OASIS ODF 1.0 Errata, but OASIS ODF 1.1 is not corrected.

We have draft corrigenda containing that fix in SC34, but it is not 
published yet.

And then we go in and want to do an ODF 1.1 amendment in ISO.

We do the diff between OASIS ODF 1.0 and OASIS ODF 1.2 and give them all 
the deltas.  Note that this does not fix the 'Wier' mispelling.  This goes 
out to ballot.

During the ballot we (ODF TC as liaison to SC34) sends a comment: "Need to 
make sure final published text includes corrections from all published 

Ballot ends, and WG6 reviews all comments received.  They see our comment 
and agree to it.  In most cases no additional work will need to be done, 
since the amendment is amending the corrected ODF 1.0 text, it already 
starts with the spelling correction.  But in some cases we may have a 
change conflict that can be resolved in the DCOR text before publication.

Finally we approve OASIS Errata that contain any corrections necessary to 
make the OASIS ODF 1.1 text correspond to the ISO text. 

This is what I meant originally when I said we could "back load" the 
application of the corrections.  Get the ballot started now.  Even though 
the amendment will be published in a form where it is an amendment of the 
corrected text, we can go ahead even without having those final 
corrections, get the ballot started, and then fix it up in the 
reconciliation process at the end.  (And for the record I had this idea 
before Obama did)


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