Re: [oiic-formation-discuss] Experts needed

["Peter Dolding" <oiaohm@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 9:55 AM, David Gerard <dgerard@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2008/6/9 Peter Dolding <oiaohm@gmail.com>:
>
>>> Representatives from the major ODF-capable applications -- at the very least
>>> OpenOffice (Sun and Novell versions), Symphony, KOffice, Google Docs &
>>> Spreadsheets and Microsoft Office.
>
>> Representatives really does not cut it.   What we need is like a ODF
>> acid test.   Pixel perfect rendering, Pixel perfect printing, standard
>> only document production and tested scripting support that everyone
>> can run.  If application does not come up to standard it fails that
>> simple and is a victim of public ridicule.
>
>
> In this regard, I suggest looking at the work Ian Hickson has been
> doing as editor for HTML5 for WHATWG and W3C (he's producing one spec
> for both bodies). He also maintains Acid3. With HTML5 he's putting in
> things that will make a solid standard specification, but that is
> implementable and that implementors will want to implement - and so
> the list has strong vendor participation. HTML5 is going to be a
> successful, useful, implementable and implemented standard, with large
> chunks of it being available already in Firefox 3 and Safari 3.1.
>
> In the case of ODF, the standard exists (with 1.2 being straightened
> out now) - but in all those other ways, it's directly comparable. So
> what are they doing right?
>
Its simple what they are doing right.  All parties know that Ian
Hickson will write new publicly displayed acid test that could test
all forms of handling.  There is no bias or bending for a particular
vendor of browsers.  He don't ask vendors first if this test works
with there browser instead its set like a benchmark for them to get
to.

Vendors work and expand the standard.  Ian Hickson's acid test's makes
sure they are following it.   It part fear.  Do we do this wrong and
risk that the next acid test shows it to the public.

What ever the official test for ODF is it will have to be broadly
public advertised so that stuffing up everyone knows.

Representatives from vendors work on standard.

Independent non bendable team works on the test to find out if a
application is to standard.  This team need to be independent so they
cannot be accused of bias.  Or if they are its laughed off.

Finally media coverage of the applications that pass and fail the test
to put force behind following the standard.  No program want to be
called the worse conforming bit of software out there.   Path of even
Internet Explorer is being changed by the risk of ridicule.

What Ian Hickson is doing as the editor of a standard must be
Independent and non bias.  So is not in conflict with being a test of
conformance construction.  Editor of standard is a completely
different thing to Test of Conformance they can be two different
people just for html they happen to be one person.  Ian Hickson really
wrote acid test due to html standard not being followed.  It is the
editors role in a standard to protect the standard so to hold up his
role creating a conformance test became required.  We don't want ODF
ending up where html was before the acid tests either.

There is no reason at all for any representatives to take part in
create of a test of conformance.  If a correct and valid test cannot
be made form the standard documentation without representatives it is
showing flaw in standard.   Really in that case representatives need
to go back threw the standard alteration process and fix the standard.

The idea is include people who should not be in it.   Representatives
should have no part ever to the create of a Test of Conformance of a
standard.  Advertising there conformance or there competitor lack of
is about as far as each group using the standard interaction with the
Test of Conformance should be.

Peter Dolding