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: PAS Explanatory Report template

As I work on drafting this, I want to make sure I keep you all in the loop and get your feedback.

I'll start with this outline, the JTC1-provided template that we need to follow.

I've made good progress on most of the topics.  But there are others that I could use some help on.   I've put those in <rob> elements, to make them easier to find.

Any help would be...well... helpful.

Also, feel free to add comments on areas that I didn't mark, if you have an insight to share.




PAS Explanatory Report template

References: (with links when published)
-  JTC 1 Supplement clause F.3 Preparation and Adoption of International Standards – JTC 1 PAS Transposition Process
-  JTC 1 Standing Document Guide to the Transposition of Publicly Available Specifications into International Standards

Once a PAS originator has been recognised, a PAS submission to the JTC 1 Secretariat may occur within the scope as identified on application. This submission has to be accompanied by an Explanatory Report produced by the Submitter, and a statement that the conditions for recognition have not changed or an indication of the nature of changes that have occurred. The Explanatory Report particularly shall contain statements regarding the document-related criteria.

The following paragraphs are numbered following the clause numbering in section 7.4  (Document Related Criteria) of JTC 1 Standing Document:  Guide to the Transposition of Publicly Available Specifications into International Standards.  

Please be sure to complete the following information when submitting a PAS to JTC 1.

7.4.1        Quality
Within its scope the specification shall completely describe the functionality (in terms of interfaces, protocols, formats, etc) necessary for an implementation of the PAS. If it is based on a product, it shall include all the functionality necessary to achieve the stated level of compatibility or interoperability in a product independent manner.        Completeness (M)
a) How well are all interface specified?

<rob>Not sure what to say here.  I'm not aware of any quantitative metric.  So we say "well" or "enough" or "X% more pages than ODF 1.1"?</rob>

b) How easily can implementation take place without need of additional descriptions?
c) What proof exists for successful implementations (e.g. availability of test results for media standards)?        Clarity
a) What means are used to provide definitive descriptions beyond straight text?
b) What tables, figures and reference materials are used to remove ambiguity?
c) What contextual material is provided to educate the reader?

<rob>So RelaxNG schema is beyond straight text.  We have mathematical formulas in OpenFormula.  Anything else? </rob>        Testability (M)
The extent, use and availability of conformance/interoperability tests or means of implementation verification (e.g. availability of reference material for magnetic media) shall be described, as well as the provisions the specification has for testability.
The specification shall have had sufficient review over an extended time period to characterise it as being stable.

<rob>Point to OIC work</rob>        Stability  (M)
a) How long has the specification existed, unchanged, since some form of verification (e.g. prototype testing, paper analysis, full interoperability tests) has been achieved?
b) To what extent and for how long have products been implemented using the specification?
c) What mechanisms are in place to track versions, fixes and addenda?        Availability (M)
a) Where is the specification available (e.g. one source, multinational locations, what types of distributors)?
b) How long has the specification been available?
c) Has the distribution been widespread or restricted? (describe the situation)
d) What are the costs associated with specification availability?

7.4.2        Consensus (M)
The accompanying report shall describe the extent of (inter)national consensus that the document has already achieved.        Development Consensus
a) Describe the process by which the specification was developed.
b) Describe the process by which the specification was approved.
c) What “levels” of approval have been obtained?        Response to User Requirements
a) How and when were user requirements considered and utilized?
b) To what extent have users demonstrated satisfaction?

<rob>"User" in this context presumably is the user of the specification, not the user implementation.  So we have our comment list and JIRA and we can talk about how many issues were resolved in ODF 1.2</rob>        Market Acceptance
a) How widespread is the market acceptance today?  Anticipated?
b) What evidence is there of market acceptance in the literature?

<rob>So we can talk about market acceptance in the first question by pointing to notable implementations.  But what does "market acceptance in the literature" mean?  Does it mean reference to the standard from other standards?  From academic papers?  Government regulations?</rob>        Credibility
a) What is the extent and sue of conformance tests or means of implementation verification?
b) What provisions does the specification have for testability?

<rob>Seems to be a repeat of        Testability (M) above</rob>

7.4.3        Alignment
The specification should be aligned with existing JTC 1 standards or ongoing work and thus complement existing standards, architectures and style guides.  Any conflicts with existing standards, architectures and style guides should be made clear and justified.        Relationship to Existing Standards
a) What International Standards are closely related to the specification and how?
b) To what International Standards is the proposed specification a natural extension?
c) How the specification is related to emerging and ongoing JTC 1 projects?        Adaptability and Migration
a) What adaptations (migrations) of either the specification or International Standards would improve the relationship between the specification and International Standards?
b) How much flexibility do the proponents of the specification have?
c) What are the longer-range plans for new/evolving specifications?        Substitution and Replacement
a) What needs exist, if any, to replace an existing International Standard?  Rationale?
b) What is the need and feasibility of using only a portion of the specification as an International Standard?
c) What portions, if any, of the specification do not belong in an International Standard (e.g. too implementation-specific)?        Document Format and Style
a) What plans, if any, exist to conform to JTC 1 document styles?

<rob>This is a good if Patrick could provide a short summary of the style/structure improvements made in ODF 1.2 to conform to ISO Directives.</rob>

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