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] Errata ballot or new revision?

There is a misunderstanding.  In the review if IS 26300:2006/COR1, one of
the items was questioned because it did not do anything.  It can't be
repaired in COR1 because the error is in Errata 01 itself (it is not just
not a typography problem between Errata 01 and COR1, it is a production
error in the original Errata 01 that was not caught).

In order to correct that DEFECT in Errata 01, we must repair it in Errata 02
(in Part 2 not Part 1), because we can't touch Errata 01.  This means the
particular change will not be in COR1 but it will be in Errata 02 and it may
or may not be involved in the reconciliation of comments on the FPDAM for
alignment with ODF 1.1.

I don't have the actual defect item in front of me, but the statement that
ISO will not see Errata 01 is a mistake.  They are seeing it now, without
the buggy erratum (I presume).  The only way to get that change into IS
26300 now is via Part 2 of Errata 02 (directly or indirectly, depending on
how the process goes).

-----Original Message-----
From: Svante.Schubert@Sun.COM [mailto:Svante.Schubert@Sun.COM] 
Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 03:37
To: ODF TC List
Cc: dennis.hamilton@acm.org; robert_weir@us.ibm.com; Patrick Durusau
Subject: Re: [office] Errata ballot or new revision?

[ ... ]

ISO will never touch the Errata 01. The previous part will be stripped
off before usage, only OASIS got one combining errata document.
[ ... ] 

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