[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [oiic-formation-discuss] Feedback to the ODF TC
2008/6/23 <robert_weir@us.ibm.com>: > > "Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com> wrote on 06/22/2008 07:57:33 AM: >> >> >> This is why the TC needs to be able to feed these examples back to the >> main TC for cleanup. >> This should be a deliverable. >> > > Would you want this as a formal report, where the proposed TC reviews the > ODF standard and comes up with a list of such ambiguous clauses, much as the > Accessibility TC reviewed ODF 1.0 and wrote up recommendations? I see this as a side effect of reviewing the spec for conformance checks? And yes, I think it should be a formal report (with early access if feasible) to the main TC, with a clear expectation that a response is given to each and every clause. > > Or are you suggesting that these instances would be naturally found in the > process of creating our test requirements document, and as we search for > testable provisions in the ODF standard, such ambiguous statements would be > reported, individually, to the ODF TC? Too easy for this to be lost in the noise. I'll give credence to Pauls view here. Especially since Oasis has no bugzilla system to retain a log on public view. regards -- Dave Pawson XSLT XSL-FO FAQ. http://www.dpawson.co.uk
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]