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] JIRA Issues for 12 October 2015 TC Teleconference


Apologies to Michael for the lateness of my response but in general I am line with Michael's suggested disposition on these issues.

Does anyone disagree?

Any objection to taking up commented issues first so we can dispose of them quickly?

Hope everyone is having a great weekend!


On 10/05/2015 12:05 PM, Michael Stahl wrote:
On 28.09.2015 20:27, Patrick Durusau wrote:

Another rough bundle of JIRA issues with notes, etc. for discussion at
our next teleconference.
hi Patrick,

thanks for sending these.

the issues are sorted in descending order, would it be possible to sort
them ascending?

in the last meeting we went through them in descending order too, and
now we still have issues 353 - 228 outstanding from that, and the issues
426 - 602 are "done"; if we use ascending order then we will always have
a "lowest numbered un-discussed issue", which seems easier to me.

also, for those issues where we agreed on deferring to ODF-Next or
closing, did we discuss who is going to make those changes in JIRA?  can
any TC member do that, or do the chairs want to do it themselves?

since i have some time now, here are some comments about these issues:


i'd rather not resolve anything as a duplicate of OFFICE-659 since that
is a rather confusing comment that mingles 2 different issues, the FFT
function and the "function to call external program" idea of OFFICE-513,
and on top of that wants to define the term "Real Freedom".

better to resolve OFFICE-659 as a duplicate and point to OFFICE-513 and
OFFICE-638 for its 2 issues.

OFFICE-657 is a reply to the mail from OFFICE-638. the surviving issue
should get target ODF-Next.

* OFFICE-645

my guess is that this refers to 9.4.12 <table:named-range> and/or 9.4.13
<table:named-expression>, neither of which allow an xml:id attribute, so
closing them with "just use RDF" appears premature.

* OFFICE-688

the unresolved part of it is the proposal to move to something other
than XML Schema-2 data types - i have no idea what the benefit of that
would be or why we should do that.

* OFFICE-737

ODF 1.2 was released with that attribute name and we don't want to break
compatibility so close this one.

* OFFICE-752, OFFICE-758

these are clearly duplicates; despite the subject OFFICE-752 has nothing
to do with SUMMARY() as the author has just hi-jacked an existing email

however after attempting to read the attached document, it is completely
unclear to me what the requested function should actually do.


Patrick Durusau
Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB)
OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
Co-Editor 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]