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] Proposed Use case -- Interoperability in vertical and horizontal ODF markets

On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 8:29 AM, jose lorenzo <hozelda@yahoo.com> wrote:

Hi, Jose,

You raise issues worthy of answer and I compliment you on your
discussion of them. However, I ask a question on how you would prefer
that I answer.

The problem I perceive is that your post spans the subject matter of
three different proposals, each of which has at least one separate
thread in the record of the meeting. I am wary of a discussion that is
already akin to search for a needle in a haystack to find any
connection between them. I do not single you out here; I have
contributed to the mess myself. But if I respond to the entirety of
your post here, then there is no obvious connection between the
different threads.

At the same time, I would prefer that we move toward an integration of
our discussion of related proposals and avoid so much as we feasibly
can further fragmentation of their discussion.  Mailing lists were not
designed for the kind of conversation we are having. Even a wiki would
be better. I would suggest that we use one were it not for the fact
that the list archives are the only officially designated record of
this meeting.

So I ask for your ideas on how we might begin consolidating the
discussion of our related proposals.

One thought is to begin a new thread with links in the first post to
related threads in the email archives, then forward your post to that
thread and use that thread for consolidating the discussion of our
respective proposals insofar as they relate to one another.

A post in each of the relevant threads linking to the email archive
link for the consolidated discussion thread would then provide a handy
cross referencing tool from any of the related threads.

I am not wedded to that approach, but I do think we need to agree on
how to deal with the fragmentation problem before I respond. (I will
review the thread for your proposal and work on a response in the
meantime.)  I was not aware of your proposal. I will study it with
interest and would like to respond to your post to this thread in an
effort to find common ground that from my first reading of your post
looks like we might fairly quickly find.

I solicit your suggestion on how we might move toward rectification of
our proposals without unnecessary fragmentation of the discussion.  I
also suggest that we focus on hammering out specific language for the
charter in our areas of agreement, working toward a unified proposal
we can both support.

Without reviewing your specific proposal and reading only your post I
respond to, my initial impression is that we share a common goal but
disagree only as to specific steps in arriving at the goal. My
experience in successful negotiations is that a focus on defining
areas of agreement rather than focusing on areas of disagreement is
the most productive path. If we agree on the destination, then it
matters less which road we follow to reach it.

Best regards,

Paul E. Merrell, J.D. (Marbux)

Universal Interoperability Council

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