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] Preparing ballot text -- I need your CT links


Operational transformation was proven feasible in Google's Wave technology, if you want a recent example of its use. The actual history of operational transformation is a good bit older than that, all with proven implementations.

What the select committee report suggested was that operational transformations be specified for the limited case of change tracking, leaving more exotic applications/extensions for some future revisions.

The purpose of the proposed ballot is go get the TC out of study mode and into full specification and testing mode with regard to *a* change tracking proposal.

Note that I said "get the TC" into that mode.

NOT to assign work to particular members of the TC. That is the entire TC needs to start working on *a* change tracking proposal.

I have disagreed in the past and will no doubt in the future disagree with choices made by the TC on technical issues. That does not mean that I should wait for others to do the work simply because I disagree.

If the TC chooses MCT (which I think it should) and the *entire* TC works on it following that choice, we satisfy any concerns with testing long before it appears as a TC reviewed draft text.

That is to say, up to the point of decision, we have "our" positions.

After a TC decision, there is only the TC's position. (Which it can change at any point but we all need to be rowing in one direction, at least some of the time.)

Aside to Rob: Let's proceed with the ballot as you indicated on Monday.

Hope you are having a great day!


On 07/25/2012 04:46 AM, Robin LaFontaine wrote:

I am clear about the choices but not so clear about the wording of the proposal. As Chair of the ADC Subcommittee, I need to point out to the TC that at this stage ECT and GCT have had significant peer review but MCT has not yet had this review.

Therefore I would strongly advise the TC not to adopt MCT without the proviso that it proves that it can work as a solution.

To adopt a proposal with no specification (other than a presentation) for a major area of ODF seems to be taking an unjustifiable risk with a major standard.

MCT appeared on the scene with one proponent, and as such it was difficult to justify further delay and SC work to include it in the SC report. MCT now has a significant following, though it is still not yet technically proven.

Perhaps a motion that would get wider consensus would be along these lines:

"The TC instructs the ADC SC to investigate fully the MCT proposal over a period of at least six months but no more than nine months and if at the end of that evaluation period the major technical risks have been removed and prototypes demonstrate that it will provide a better solution than the other proposals, the TC will adopt it for inclusion in the next version of ODF. The TC does this on the understanding that the MCT proponents will provide a specification and support for this work."

That would I think be both more prudent and achieve more consensus. I would of course step down as ADC SC chair so an independent chair can be appointed.


On 23/07/2012 19:07, robert_weir@us.ibm.com wrote:
As discussed in today's TC call I plan on starting a 7-day electronic ballot on the change tracking proposals.  I'd like to start the ballot on Wednesday morning at the latest.  

The choices in the ballot will be (in alphabetical order)

1) ECT
2) GCT
3) MCT
4) None of the above
5) Abstain

Proponents of the proposals are invited to send me links that further describe their proposal (list message, wiki, document, whatever).  I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth, so I'll only add links if they are provided.

Please send along the links before end of day Tuesday.



-- -----------------------------------------------------------------
Robin La Fontaine, Director, DeltaXML Ltd  "Experts in information change"
T: +44 1684 592 144  E: robin.lafontaine@deltaxml.com      
Registered in England 02528681 Reg. Office: Monsell House, WR8 0QN, UK
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: office-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org For additional commands, e-mail: office-help@lists.oasis-open.org

Patrick Durusau
Former 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
Twitter: patrickDurusau 

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