Re: [oiic-formation-discuss] Draft Interoperability and Conformance TCformation proposal (0.2)

[robert_weir@us.ibm.com]

"Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com> wrote on 07/25/2008 01:51:20 AM:

> 
> 
>   I have been shopping this draft around, attempting to get views and
> > comments from a variety of possible participants, and not exclusively 
from
> > this list.
> 
> Pity you're not more of a team player Rob.
> 
> 

Maybe I just have a broader sense of what the team is?

> 
> > It is fair to let you know that I intend to move this forward into a 
formal
> > proposal for a new TC soon, well before the 90 day period of the 
discussion
> > list has expired.
> 
> 
> IOW you really didn't need the input from this group at all?
> 
> Others please note. Rob has no need of consensus from this group
> according to the (lack of ) Oasis process for TC formation.
> 

OASIS process does not require the existence of a formation discussion 
list at all.  I said that quite a while ago.  The only reason we have a 
list in the first place is because I personally pushed for one, to broaden 
the participation in the discussion.  Not to replace all other inputs, but 
to broaden the scope of input. I certainly have found much value in having 
this discussion. 

I'm still interested in such input.  That is why I posted this draft of 
the proposed charter. 

> -------------------------------------
> >
> > TC formation proposal.
> >
> > 1a. Name:  OASIS OpenDocument Format Interoperability and Conformance
> > Technical Committee (OIC TC)
> 
> > 1b. Statement of Purpose
> >
> > The OpenDocument Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) OASIS
> > Standard defines an XML schema for office applications and its 
semantics.
> > The schema is suitable for office documents, including text documents,
> > spreadsheets, charts and graphical documents like drawings or 
presentations,
> > but is not restricted to these kinds of documents.
> 
> Unnecessary. Delete.
> 

This is a common thread among all of the ODF-related TC's, being the first 
paragraph of the ODF TC's charter as well as the ODF Adoption TC's 
charter.  I'd like to keep it.  Since the charter will be the primary text 
for the eventual Call for Participation, I think that provides a good 
summary of the underlying subject matter for those who may not be familiar 
with ODF.

> 
> 
> >
> > There are several commercial and open source applications available 
based on
> > the OpenDocument Format, with more currently under development.  With 
the
> > depth and breadth of functionality specified by ODF, achieving 
conformance
> > and interoperability requires attention to numerous details and 
diverse
> > requirements.
> 
> Not a statement of purpose.
> 

This and other comments show a lack of understanding of the requirements 
for OASIS charters.  You might want to review these requirements  In 
particular, note that the purpose section must include "a definition of 
the problem to be solved", which is what we have stated here.

> 
> >
> > It is the purpose of the OIC TC to produce materials and host events 
that
> > will help implementors create applications which conform the ODF 
standard
> > and which are able to interoperate.
> 
> Is IBM hosting these events? Never mentioned on this list.
> 

Where is IBM mentioned?

A few likely charter members of the proposed OIC TC have discussed hosting 
an interoperability event at the OpenOffice.org conference in Beijing, in 
November.  The ODF Adoption TC hosted a similar event last year at this 
conference and we were able to get representatives from most of the ODF 
vendors to attend:  Sun, IBM, Google, KOffice, AbiWord, SEPT Solutions, 
etc.

In any case, the event hosting aspect of the charter was stated in the 
first draft the scope statement sent as message #1 on this list back on 
June 2nd.


> 
> 
> >
> > 1c. Scope of Work
> >
> > In accordance with the OIC TC's purpose, the scope of our work will 
include
> > the following activities:
> >
> > Initially and periodically thereafter, to review the current state of
> > conformance and interoperability among ODF implementations, and 
toproduce a
> > an impartial report that notes areas of accomplishment as well as 
areas
> > needing improvement, and which recommends prioritized activities for
> > advancing the state of conformance and interoperability among ODF
> > implementations;
> 
> Is this a scoping statement?
> 

I believe so.

> 
> > To collect the provisions of the ODF standard, and of standards 
normatively
> > referenced by the ODF standard, and to produce a comprehensive 
conformity
> > assessment methodology specification which enumerates all collected
> > provisions, as well as specific actions recommended to test each 
provision,
> > including definition of preconditions, expected results, scoring and
> > reporting;
> 
> A very unclear task. Not scope. Inappropriate in this section.
> 

I believe this is scope.

> 
> > To select a corpus of ODF interoperability test documents, such 
documents to
> > be created the OIC TC, or received as member or public contributions; 
To
> > publish the ODF interoperability test corpus and promote its use in
> > interoperability workshops and similar events;
> 
> An activity, not a scoping statement.
> 

Perhaps you need to refresh yourself on what scope is, in an OASIS 
charter.  It is "a definition of what is and what is not the work of the 
TC".  That is what you see here. 


> 
> 
> > To define profiles of ODF which will increase interoperability among
> > implementations in the same vertical domain, for example, ODF/A for
> > archiving;
> 
> An activity, not a scoping statement.
> How might a profile (undefined) increase interop?
> 

Activity == a definition of what is the work of the TC == proper material 
for a Scope of Work statement in an OASIS charter.

> 
> 
> > To define profiles of ODF which will increase interoperability among
> > implementations in the same horizontal domain, for example ODF Mobile 
for
> > pervasive devices, or ODF Web for browser-based editors.
> 
> An activity, not a scoping statement.
> 

See above.

> 
> 
> > To provide feedback, where necessary, to the ODF TC on changes to ODF 
that
> > might improve interoperability;
> 
> At last! But still an activity, not a scoping statement.
> 

See above.

> 
> > To coordinate, in conjunction with the ODF Adoption TC, Interop 
Workshops
> > and OASIS InterOp demos related to ODF;
> 
> This from the man who said we shouldn't be writing software. U turn Rob.
> 

What does this have to do with software?  You've lost me there, Dave.

> Reminder. Scope. The sphere or area over which any activity operates
> or is effective; range of application or of subjects embraced; the
> reach or tendency of an argument, etc.; the field covered by a branch
> of knowledge, an inquiry, concept, etc.
> 

The relevant definition would be that given by OASIS in their TC formation 
process:

"The scope of the work of the TC, which must be germane to the mission of 
OASIS, and which includes a definition of what is and what is not the work 
of the TC, and how it can be determined when the work of the TC has been 
completed. The scope may reference a specific contribution of existing 
work as a starting point, but other contributions may be made by TC 
Members on or after the first meeting of the TC. Such other contributions 
shall be considered by the TC Members on an equal basis to improve the 
original starting point contribution."

> 
> 
> 
> > To liaise on conformance and interoperability topics with other TC's 
and
> > bodies whose work is leveraged in present or future ODF 
specifications, and
> > with committees dealing with conformance and interoperability in 
general.
> 
> An activity. Fresh from the mind of RW?
> 

This statement dates back to the beginning of June and in fact as in the 
original draft scope sent as the very first posting to this list on June 
2nd: 

http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oiic-formation-discuss/200806/msg00001.html 
 

That statement itself was borrowed from the ebXML IIC TC's Charter here: 

http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ebxml-iic/charter.php

So it is neither fresh, nor from my mind.  But thanks for the compliment 
all the same.

> >
> > The following activities are explicitly not within the Scope of the 
OIC TC:
> >
> > Acting as a rating or certifying authority or agency for conformance 
of ODF
> > implementations;
> > Authoring or distributing software that tests the conformance or
> > interoperability of ODF implementations;
> 
> Despite providing demonstrations? With vapourware perhaps?
> 

I'm not sure of the objection here.  Do you a reason why not distributing 
software would be incompatible with giving a demo?  Remember, the Charter 
restricts what the TC does as a TC.  It does not restrict what TC members 
do as individuals outside of the TC. 

> 
> >
> > 1d. List of Deliverables
> >
> > Initial report on the state of ODF conformance and interoperability 
(March
> > 1st, 2009);
> > Report on the best practices on profiles and recommendations on 
possible
> > ODF-related profiles (April 1st, 2009);
> 
> I wouldn't take you on for project estimating Rob.
> 

That is probably a good call.  I'm horrible at estimations.

> 
> > A conformity assessment methodology specification, detailing how each
> > provision and recommendation in the ODF standard may be tested for
> > conformance (May 1st, 2009);
> 
> Like the spec itself, note the 'may'
> 

Dave, you are always free to make a specific suggestion, including any 
replacement text.  That would save time and  avoid the necessity of 
reading your mind.

> 
> > Interoperability test corpus documents,  released in batches, 
according to
> > functional area (several incremental deliverables, Q4 2008 through 
2009)
> 
> No definition of " Interoperability test corpus documents,"? Who'se 
supposed
> to translate this?
> 

If more definition is required, it should go in the Scope of Work section 
with this term is first used.  Any specific suggestions?

> 
> >
> > 1e. IPR Mode
> >
> > This TC will operate under the "RF on Limited Terms" mode
> >
> > 1f. Audience
> >
> > The direct audience of the OIC TC's work will be:
> >
> > Implementors -- Commercial and Open Source publishers of ODF native or
> > compatible applications and tools.
> > Testers -- Third-party testing and certification labs.
> > Procurers -- Those who purchase or define requirements for the 
purchase of
> > ODF-related technology.
> > Regulators -- Officials who specify the use of document standards.
> >
> > Other, indirect users of the TC's work may include:
> >
> > Integrators -- Third-party developers and independent software vendors 
who
> > interact with and/or integrate ODF.
> > Users -- End Users of ODF applications and tools, including both 
typical and
> > "power" users.
> >
> > 1g. Language of the TC
> >
> > TC business will be conducted in English.
> >
> >
> > 2. Informative information
> >
> >
> > 2a. Similar work
> >
> > We note the work of Lotzi Bölöni at the University of Central Florida 
and
> > his initial work in defining an ODF "test suite", work now maintained 
by the
> > Open Document Fellowship:
> >
> > http://develop.opendocumentfellowship.com/testsuite/
> >
> >
> > We also note that the work of the OASIS Test Assertions Guidelines 
(TAG) TC
> > may be of use to us in defining test cases:
> >
> > http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=tag
> >
> > Sun Microsystems has has also done some work related to ODF 
conformance
> > testing:
> >
> > 
http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/openoffice_org_odf_validation_service
> >
> > We note that the W3C has test suite work efforts pertaining so several 
of
> > the standards which ODF references, including MathML and XForms.  We 
would
> > expect to consult with them on any overlapping topics.
> >
> > Finally we observe that the OASIS ODF TC owns the ODF standard, 
including
> > the definition of conformance for ODF.   The OIC TC's work does not 
overlap,
> > since our scope would not including defining conformance for ODF
> 
> Pardon. Go read the proposed TC title?
> Moving towards farce Rob.
> 

Do you disagree? Where does the scope statement of the proposed OIC TC 
overlap with the scope statement of the ODF TC? 

> " we observe that "... Which 'we' Rob? You and your employers?
> Certainly not the group of people on this list.
> 

Formally, the use of "we" would refer to the initial signatories to the 
charter when it is submitted to OASIS.  If they agree, the sign.  If they 
don't agree, then they don't sign, or they suggest alterative wording. 
Generally, those who merely complain without making suggestions neither 
sign nor get changes made for them.

> 
> 
> , but
> > defining test cases (preconditions, specific test actions, expected 
results)
> > that are traceable to the provisions of the ODF standard and 
referenced
> > standards.
> 
> Your confusion is showing Rob - how is this not a compliance test?
> 

I don't see the conflict here.  Maybe you can be more explicit about what 
is confusing to you.  Defining conformance is not the same as creating a 
conformity assessment methodology specification.

ISO defines it as: "A conformity assessment methodology may include the 
specification of some or all of the following: terminology, basic 
concepts, requirements and guidance concerning test methods, test 
specification and means of testing, and requirements and guidance 
concerning the operation of conformity assessment services and the 
presentation of results."

Also observe that there are some on this list who think that this work 
should be done by the ODF TC itself, while there are others that think 
that it should not be done by OASIS or the implementors at all, but by 
third parties. So I'm not going to please everyone. Luckily I'm not 
required to please everyone.

Regards,

-Rob