[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [oiic-formation-discuss] My perspective. display perferct?
2008/7/1 Thomas Zander <zander@kde.org>: > On Tuesday 1. July 2008 18:54:54 Dave Pawson wrote: >> Simply because it isn't an Oasis standard at this time of writing. >> If, when the TC is constituted, 1.2 is the current Oasis standard, >> then quote that. >> Until then, 1.2 and any other 'non existant' Oasis standards are >> properly undefined >> and hence created an undefined workload for the TC. > > I don't buy this argument, explicitly forbidding the TC from working on a > not-yet-published standard seems a bit extreme. > Your point that it creates an undefined workload is incorrect since the TC > decides what it will work on, limiting what they are allowed to work on does > nothing but limit the flexibility. In various cases its a good thing, but > using it to relieve pressure sounds like going the wrong way. > > Do you have any other reasons for wanting this section in? (2) A preliminary statement of scope for the TC whose formation the list is intended to discuss. Without a definition of what is to be tested for compliance, we are unable to deliver the scope. 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]