Re: [opendocument-users] Improvement submissions to the ODF-TC?

[robert_weir@us.ibm.com]

marbux <marbux@gmail.com> wrote on 05/15/2009 12:25:13 PM:

> 
> Re: [opendocument-users] Improvement submissions to the ODF-TC?
> 
> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 8:04 AM,  <robert_weir@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> > Whether something was discussed and whether it was addressed or not is
> > best determined by by reference to meeting agenda and minutes which 
are
> > posted to the list.
> 
> John, Rob apparently had a forgetful moment. There were numerous
> occasions prior to Rob being anointed as co-chair when proposals never
> made it onto the TC agenda even as discussion items. There were also
> problems with agenda items falling off the agenda (repeatedly with one
> interoperability proposal by the KDE team to specify document settings
> to clear up the mess left by different implementations creating their
> own custom settings).
> 

"Falling off the agenda" was mainly due to abandonment by proposers.  The 
current standing rules make it clear that it is the proposers' 
responsibility, not the chairs', to drive the proposal through the review 
and approval process. 

> Memorable among those proposals that never made it onto the agenda are
> the five proposals submitted by Florian Reuter, now of Novell but
> previously CTO of the OpenDocument Foundation, aimed at removing
> interoperability barriers between ODF implementations and Microsoft
> Office. (The Foundation is no longer a going concern but I was its
> Director of Legal Affairs.) As I recall, three of those proposals were
> on the TC list and the other two were on the Metadata Subcommittee
> list.
> 

Florian is a TC member.  If he wishes to make a proposal, the process for 
this is clearly defined for almost a year now.  There is nothing that 
prevents him from reiterating any proposal which he feels was not acted on 
before.  Personally my recollection is that his proposal was voted on and 
defeated.  But if he thinks differently, he is free to submit it according 
to the standard rule.  The remedy is in his hands and has been.  This is 
well known.  In fact Novell just submitted a new proposal last week, for 
improving compatibility with password protected Excel documents.  It will 
be processed according to the standing rule.

.
.
.

> 
> I'd be happy to help either on this list or by off-list email, but as
> I understand previous rulings, such a discussion would be off-topic
> for this list. So if you desire my assistance, off-list communications
> would best avoid the wrath of the resident censors.
> 
> Even discussion of the procedural limits imposed by international and
> federal law governing standards development work is deemed off-topic
> for the ODF TC mailing lists. Compare these two posts from the last 24
> hours.  <http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office-comment/200905/
> msg00028.html>
> and <
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office-comment/200905/msg00022.html
> >.
> 

This list is "an open forum for developers to exchange ideas and 
information on implementing the office OASIS Standard."  You are correct 
that it is not the place to discuss "international and federal law 
governing standards development work".  It is not a  matter of wrath.  It 
is a matter of maintaining a reasonable signal-to-noise ratio for those 
who wish to use the list for its intended purpose.

-Rob