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] Notes from SC34/WG6 meeting; Next steps for ISO ODF 1.2

I’ve added these to JIRA – the titles are my summary of each comment, but the complete comment text and any proposed resolution is included in the body of the bug.


I left the resolution date blank for the moment, and logged them as applying to “ODF 1.2”.




From: office@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:office@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of robert_weir@us.ibm.com
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2014 21:38
To: OpenDocument TC List
Cc: Jamie Clark
Subject: [office] Notes from SC34/WG6 meeting; Next steps for ISO ODF 1.2


We had a teleconference meeting of WG6 last night (this morning in Japan where SC34 was meeting).  Chris Rae and I attended for the ODF TC.   We briefly discussed the results of the PAS ballot and the next steps.

In summary:

-- We (OASIS as the PAS submittor via the ODF TC) need to write up a response to each of the comments received, saying what our recommendation is.    Actions might be to fix in an errata (if it fits within the kinds of changes permitted in OASIS Approved Errata), push off until ODF 1.3 (where more substantive changes can be made), disagree with the comment altogether, etc.   IMHO we should copy each of the comments into JIRA and resolve them via our normal workflow.

- Once we have such a "disposition of comments report" we would submit it to SC34, probably via Patrick.

- Then a Ballot Resolution Meeting (BRM) would occur.   This could be a face-to-face meeting or, because the comment list is short, a teleconference.   To me it sounded like a teleconference BRM would be the most convenient.   If anyone has a preference for F2F, speak up now.  

- The output of the BRM would be a list of changes to ODF 1.2 that are agreed on by us and SC34.    These changes could then be balloted in parallel as Approved Errata in OASIS and Corrigenda in SC34.

- SC34 has meeting notification requirements.  Scheduling a BRM, including one conducted via teleconference, requires 2 months notice.   So our initial task is to estimate how long it will take for us to review the ballot comments, agree on proposed editing instructions and submit this to SC34.  Preparing these proposed editing instructions might require some back-and-forth if the comments are not perfectly clear.  As soon as we have this estimate we should let SC34 know so they can schedule the BRM.  



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