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] ODF v1.2 submission for OS ballot

On 2011-01-02, at 15:43, "robert_weir@us.ibm.com" <robert_weir@us.ibm.com 
 > wrote:

> "Andreas J. Guelzow" <andreas.guelzow@concordia.ab.ca> wrote on  
> 01/02/2011
> 01:18:07 PM:
>> Some of the comments on the JIRA issues state
>> "The comment is not in scope of the PRD02 public review."
>> It is not quite clear to me what "in the scope of PRD02 public  
>> review"
>> means. There are clearly some parts of the document that were not  
>> since
>> the last review but whose meaning or interpretation has changed due  
>> to
>> changes elsewhere.
>> For example OFFICE-3583, the term in question there (escape angle)  
>> was
>> replaced elsewhere with a different term (leaving angle), so while  
>> there
>> was no change in this specific place the changes that were made
>> elsewhere have made this (in my mind) clearly an item in scope for  
>> this
>> review.
> The OASIS rule is:  "Changes made to a committee draft after a  
> review must
> be clearly identified in any subsequent review, and the subsequent  
> review
> shall be limited in scope to changes made in the previous review."
> So the scope is limited to "changes made in the previous review".
> However, I'd tend to read that broadly, to include explicit text  
> changes
> as well as those unchanged parts of the text whose interpretation has
> changed based on the explicit text changes.

I would agree with that reading, and so claim that OFFICE-3583 is in  
fact in scope.


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