Re: [oiic-formation-discuss] Which is definitive odf?

["Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com>]

2008/6/19  <robert_weir@us.ibm.com>:

>> Why would the TC need to recharter if they start out (and maybe even
>> finish)
>> working on 1.1... then 1.2 comes along? I don't see that as constrained
>> by the process document?
>>
>
> It depends on where you put the statement.  If you have a scope statement
> that says the TC will work on ODF 1.1, and the scope says nothing about any
> other versions of ODF, then this could be interpreted as limiting the TC to
> work on ODF 1.1, and no other versions.  If we then tried to work on ODF 1.2
> later, then we would be exceeded our charter.


Two tasks which I'd like to see in the deliverables then.

1. Review ODF for testability, produce compliance checks. Start ASAP.
Duration (+- 6months) 24months)
2. Review newer versions of ODF as they are produced by the TC for
testability; Start, when 1 finished Duration indeterminate.



>
> That's one of the things that scope does, it sets the bounds of our
> activities.
>
> We also asked to list our deliverables and estimated dates.  That's where
> I'd put the ODF 1.1 and ODF 1.2 deliverables, sequenced in that order.
>
> So keep the scope general -- ODF (with no version stated) and have the
> deliverables give the detailed sequencing.

Which wouldn't give the TC a version to do the compliance against. Hence No Rob.

Mary, thanks for your note.

regards



-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk