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] [OASIS Issue Tracker] Created: (OFFICE-2694) ODF 1.2draft 3 breaks modularity

Dear Dennis,

I find myself in agreement with Rob and Michael on this issue, albeit 
for slightly different reasons.

Not to overload the term "packaging" but I think you need to distinguish:

1) The formal "packaging" of the standard, which is to no small degree 
dictated by policy concerns of the respective standards organizations, and

2) The ability of to claim conformance to some part of the standard.

If your concern is with #2, then I think we continue to meet that 

The formal arrangement is determined by OASIS rules. The content within 
that formal arrangement is determined by the ODF TC. Conformance is 
based on the content, not the formal arrangement. We could quite easily 
say that conformance means meeting the requirements of one sub-paragraph 
in part 2 and another sub-paragraph in part 1. We haven't but what 
constitutes conformance is up to the TC, not OASIS. The form of the 
documents stating those rules, however, is up to OASIS.

Does that help?

Hope you are having a great Memorial Day (in the US)!


PS: The question of how skillfully we have separated those concerns or 
answered them is always open to debate but let's be careful to separate 
formal requirements, over which we have no control and content of the 
standards, over which we do exercise control.

On 5/28/2010 9:26 PM, OASIS Issues Tracker wrote:
> ODF 1.2 draft 3 breaks modularity
> ---------------------------------
>                   Key: OFFICE-2694
>                   URL: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/OFFICE-2694
>               Project: OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) TC
>            Issue Type: Bug
>            Components: Conformance, General
>      Affects Versions: ODF 1.2 Part 3 CD 2, ODF 1.2 Part 1 CD 5, ODF 1.2 Part 2 CD 3
>           Environment: This issue applies to the restructured parts 1-2-3 and the overview that are balloted for approval as a Committee Draft(s) for Public Review: OpenDocument-v1.2-draft3.odt, OpenDocument-v1.2-part1-cd04-rev08.odt, OpenDocument-v1.2-part2-cd02-rev08.odt, and OpenDocument-v1.2-part3-cd01-rev07.odt.
>              Reporter: Dennis Hamilton
>              Priority: Blocker
>               Fix For: ODF 1.2
> 1. This new packaging breaks the modularity by which part2 and part3 are independently usable and relatively self-contained.
>      1.1 The removal of conformance sections from all parts, with the only conformance section being in the OpenDocument-v1.2-draft3.odt causes these parts to be inextricably intertwined.  This strikes me as a question of substance that requires discussion.
>      1.2 This organization also creates unnecessary duplication and burdens readers with the need to consult multiple documents for no useful purpose.
>      1.3 The additional complexity of maintenance of the specifications, potential errata and defect-reconciliation efforts, and the prospect of inconsistency between the parts seems unjustifiable.  (There are already inconsistencies between the new 1.2-draft3 and provisions referenced in the other parts of the specification.)
>   2. It also seems excessive that OpenDocument-v1.2-draft3.odt consists of
>    * 93 pages of front matter, including duplication of the tables of contents of parts 1-3,
>     * 3 pages of back matter, and
>     * only three pages having modest narrative content and creating a list of conformance clauses that makes it indispensible to the other parts.
>   3. Finally, I think this approach is an unwarranted imposition on the time and efforts of those who we wish to embrace this specification, invest in its review, and engage in implementation, testing, and verification of products that support OpenDocument.
> [Note: I am concerned that attempting to remedy this as part of a re-issue in a 15-day secondary public review would be too dificult.  After examining the material and the new sections 2 of Parts 1-3, I am satisfied that correction by elimination of v1.2-draft3 is workable.]

Patrick Durusau
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)

Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net
Homepage: http://www.durusau.net

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