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] The importance to users of documents looking the same

Sander Marechal <sander.marechal@tribal.nl> wrote on 06/19/2008 01:43:57 PM:

> robert_weir@us.ibm.com wrote:
> > If there is consensus to make CDRF based profiles, then we would add
> > that to the list of deliverables.  If there was consensus to require
> > only CDRF based profiles, then we would add that restriction to the
> > scope statement.  But I'm not hearing consensus on either of those.
> The rotten part IMHO is that the CDRF spec actually deals with two
> issues: compound documents and profiles. I don't think the compound
> documents stuff is particularly interesting for ODF or how that part
> would impact ODF, but the bits about the profiles is certainly interesting.
> Perhaps there is a way to just use the profiles aspect of CDRF and leave
> out the rest? Would it be easier to achieve consensus on just that part?

The proposed TC can certainly reuse parts of existing open standards.  ODF itself does this in many places with MathML, XForms, etc.  I think the proposed TC should, as one of its initial tasks, take a broad look at profiles and profile conventions from OASIS, W3C, ISO/IEC, etc., and create an "ODF Profile Requirements" documents that state the TC's agreed-upon way of writing profiles.  

In terms of the charter, I'd suggest adding the "ODF Profile Requirements" report to the list of deliverables.  But I think it is premature, not having done completed the research, to put specific technical limitations regarding profiles into the charter.


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