OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

oiic-formation-discuss message

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

Subject: Re: [oiic-formation-discuss] Level of detail needed in a TC Charter

"Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com> wrote on 06/14/2008 03:07:15 AM:

> Request please Rob.
> Go back to the people who wrote this fluff and ask them for a
> definition/clarification.

Surely you jest.  Are you saying that you are unable to understand the meaning of the phrase "the anticipated audience or users of the work"?  Not everything in the charter is going to be reduced to the level of Whitehead's Principia Mathematica.  The consumers of the the charter are people.  We can assume basic facility with understanding language in context.  

Again, I suggest you take any of the dozens of existing OASIS TC's and look at their charters for an indication of customary level of precision and detail.  

> While there it may be politic to see if Michael is right about this quote
> "What I'm missing a little bit is to provide guidance for implementors.
> Simply speaking, the best way to achieve interoperability between ODF
> applications is that these application implement as many of ODF as
> possible and reasonable for the specific application, and with as little
> bugs as possible. Tests are helpful to measure the quality of an
> implementation, but they don't help implementors with the implementation
> itself.
> So far we have suggestion for tests, but we do not have suggestion how
> we can help implementors in their implementation work.
> It would probably be too simple to just put an "ODF Implementors
> Guidelines" on the list of deliverables, since we don't know if
> implementors have issues with implementing ODF, and if so where. So,
> preparing guidelines, which is a huge effort, without knowing where the
> issues are has the risk we are doing something no one needs.
> "
> Is this TC expected to provide guidelines for implementers of ODF
> or guidelines for those implementing tests?

The first "i" in IIC is for Implementation.  This refers to the implementation of the base standard, here being ODF.  See for example the ebXML IIC TC (http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ebxml-iic/) whose charter includes the purpose of deliverying a "A set of reference implementation guidelines".

So it is within reason to discuss this as part of an ODF IIC discussion.  

I'm hearing that you don't like the idea, and Michael likes the idea.  So we continue to discuss.  It is not the end of the world.

> It is really silly to expect us and the following TC to work in the dark
> without recourse to the source of our direction. Pure C19.

Source of direction?  The initial proposal was posted with the Call for Participation, here:  http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oiic-formation-discuss/200806/msg00001.html

The subscribers to that proposal are listed.  Other than that, the direction of this discussion appears to beyond any single person's control.


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