[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [oiic-formation-discuss] (1)(d) A list of deliverables,with projected completion dates.
Dave, when starting the discussion about item (1)(d) Rob has made the following suggestion: > Let's get the list complete, and then we can have a round of scoring, > where we each prioritize each deliverable on a scale of 1-10 (10 is > highest priority). We can use that to inform the overall priorities and > eventual the projected schedule. I think this is a very reasonable approach, and therefore do support this approach. I therefore suggest that we complete the list of possible deliveries and ensure that each possible deliverable is unambiguously and clearly defined, (technical) feasible and formally correct before we start to prioritize them or to request to remove some of the deliverables. Your concern about the amount of work is valid, but it actually applies to all items. At some point in time we have to check whether the new TC will have members that will actually work on the deliverables. It does not help us if we have a deliverable in the charter if no one is working on it, even if it is interesting. Best regards Michael Dave Pawson wrote: > Taking one point only from Michaels post. This message is a proposal for > clarification and reduction in scope of the OIIC TC. > If you support the proposal please respond to the list. > > 2008/6/16 Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg > <Michael.Brauer@sun.com>: >>>> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oiic-formation-discuss/200806/msg00001.html > >>> 1. To publish test suites of ODF for applications of ODF to check >>> their >>> conformance with the Standard and to confirm their interoperability; >>> 2. To provide feedback, where necessary, to the ODF TC on ways in >>> which the >>> standard could improve interoperability; >>> 3. To produce a set of implementation guidelines; >>> 4. To define interoperability with related standards by the creation >>> of >>> profiles or technical reports; >>> 5. To coordinate, in conjunction with the ODF Adoption TC, OASIS >>> InterOp >>> demos related to ODF; > > > DP. >>> I interpreted item for in context. >>> >>> I.e. guidelines on implementing tests. Not implementing ODF. > > MB. >> I read it differently. My interpretation is that guidelines for implementing >> ODF are meant. >> >> Anyway, this list is not our charter. It contains only suggestion. > > > In line with the Oasis process, I would like to propose that this TC not > be given ODF implementation guidelines as part of their task. > > That the appropriate sentence in this groups input be ignored. > "3. To produce a set of implementation guidelines;" > > Rationale: This is too much work alongside the compliance testing > and the interoperability. > > If Michael wants to do this, then I suggest he form another group. > > I am cc'ing Rob to ensure he is aware of this. > > > regards > > > > -- Michael Brauer, Technical Architect Software Engineering StarOffice/OpenOffice.org Sun Microsystems GmbH Nagelsweg 55 D-20097 Hamburg, Germany firstname.lastname@example.org http://sun.com/staroffice +49 40 23646 500 http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS Sitz der Gesellschaft: Sun Microsystems GmbH, Sonnenallee 1, D-85551 Kirchheim-Heimstetten Amtsgericht Muenchen: HRB 161028 Geschaeftsfuehrer: Thomas Schroeder, Wolfgang Engels, Dr. Roland Boemer Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrates: Martin Haering