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] TC formation proposal.

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 7:34 AM, Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2008/7/21 Shawn <sgrover@open2space.com>:
>> some thoughts:
>> - I know there was discussion of this central registry.  But I don't recall
>> there being a consensus view that this should be in the document...
> I've said no to that simply because its out of scope for ODF?
> If those ideas for extensibility get into the main ODF spec then yes.
> Not until is my view.
> (I'm waiting for clarification from Peter before responding to his comments)
Part of the process of checking conformance to standard information on
abnormalities is going to turn up.

Now yes producing a report all well and good.   Creating a complete
report can take a long time.  Does not leave room for implementers to
report why these abnormalities exist without risking up set
implementers.   Path I picked might not have been best.  Also building
reports we don't want people have to chase down implementers.
Central reporting is just a nice way of here we gave you a chance to
tell us about it.  So we said that you X extension appeared to have no
practical use do to its limited use access implementation stiff you
did not tell us what it did.

Central registry is a many directional tool.  Compatibility is only
one of its advantages.  Simplified report on standard creating is
another removing claim of unfair treatment on what the report says
about there undocumented extensions.

Peter Dolding

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