RE: [office] Next steps in completing ODF 1.2

[robert_weir@us.ibm.com]

"Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote on 10/29/2010 
12:49:43 PM:
> 
> RE: [office] Next steps in completing ODF 1.2
> 
> I think it would be better to allow targeting new issues that address
> defects in CD05/CD06 to a CD07 and then decide whether there is to be no
> CD07 later (in which case the retargeting to ODF-Next will be 
inevitable).
> This provides important differentiation between issues that are
> intentionally created as ODF-Next items or are intentionally deferred
> already, versus ones where we might still deliberate on their importance 
for
> inclusion in a potential further ODF 1.2 draft.
> 
> It would be helpful if we created the provisional CD07 target now (after
> discussion on Monday) so that it is available for straightforward usage.
> 


At some point we need to go through the issues that are not yet resolved 
and not yet assigned to ODF-Next and decide if there is sufficient support 
on the TC to delay ODF 1.2 to resolve those issues. 

I think this is the main point of the proposal.  How do we distinguish 
issues that are lingering open because of lack of interest versus those 
that are really must-fix items?  Some of these issues have been open for 
over a year, without resolution.  Do we really think another week is going 
to make a difference?  Maybe.  But I wouldn't bet on it.

So one approach is to assign them all to ODF-Next and then, by exception, 
bring ones back to CD 06 where the TC agrees to do this.  This isn't an 
easy decision, but the sooner we do it, the more time we'll have to 
identify the issues that we want to bring back.

I have no objection to having a CD 07 target, but I'd want to treat it the 
same way, e.g., items get into that list only by vote of the TC.  It is 
certainly possible that during the next 15-day public review we receive a 
comment that must be addressed.  We need to be open to that possibility.

-Rob