OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) TC

 View Only
  • 1.  Notes from SC34/WG6 meeting; Next steps for ISO ODF 1.2

    Posted 09-25-2014 12:44
    We had a teleconference meeting of WG6 last night (this morning in Japan where SC34 was meeting).  Chris Rae and I attended for the ODF TC.   We briefly discussed the results of the PAS ballot and the next steps. In summary: -- We (OASIS as the PAS submittor via the ODF TC) need to write up a response to each of the comments received, saying what our recommendation is.    Actions might be to fix in an errata (if it fits within the kinds of changes permitted in OASIS Approved Errata), push off until ODF 1.3 (where more substantive changes can be made), disagree with the comment altogether, etc.   IMHO we should copy each of the comments into JIRA and resolve them via our normal workflow. - Once we have such a "disposition of comments report" we would submit it to SC34, probably via Patrick. - Then a Ballot Resolution Meeting (BRM) would occur.   This could be a face-to-face meeting or, because the comment list is short, a teleconference.   To me it sounded like a teleconference BRM would be the most convenient.   If anyone has a preference for F2F, speak up now.   - The output of the BRM would be a list of changes to ODF 1.2 that are agreed on by us and SC34.    These changes could then be balloted in parallel as Approved Errata in OASIS and Corrigenda in SC34. - SC34 has meeting notification requirements.  Scheduling a BRM, including one conducted via teleconference, requires 2 months notice.   So our initial task is to estimate how long it will take for us to review the ballot comments, agree on proposed editing instructions and submit this to SC34.  Preparing these proposed editing instructions might require some back-and-forth if the comments are not perfectly clear.  As soon as we have this estimate we should let SC34 know so they can schedule the BRM.   Regards, -Rob


  • 2.  RE: [office] Notes from SC34/WG6 meeting; Next steps for ISO ODF 1.2

    Posted 09-26-2014 02:43
    I’ve added these to JIRA – the titles are my summary of each comment, but the complete comment text and any proposed resolution is included in the body of the bug.   I left the resolution date blank for the moment, and logged them as applying to “ODF 1.2”.   Chris   From: office@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:office@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of robert_weir@us.ibm.com Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2014 21:38 To: OpenDocument TC List Cc: Jamie Clark Subject: [office] Notes from SC34/WG6 meeting; Next steps for ISO ODF 1.2   We had a teleconference meeting of WG6 last night (this morning in Japan where SC34 was meeting).  Chris Rae and I attended for the ODF TC.   We briefly discussed the results of the PAS ballot and the next steps. In summary: -- We (OASIS as the PAS submittor via the ODF TC) need to write up a response to each of the comments received, saying what our recommendation is.    Actions might be to fix in an errata (if it fits within the kinds of changes permitted in OASIS Approved Errata), push off until ODF 1.3 (where more substantive changes can be made), disagree with the comment altogether, etc.   IMHO we should copy each of the comments into JIRA and resolve them via our normal workflow. - Once we have such a "disposition of comments report" we would submit it to SC34, probably via Patrick. - Then a Ballot Resolution Meeting (BRM) would occur.   This could be a face-to-face meeting or, because the comment list is short, a teleconference.   To me it sounded like a teleconference BRM would be the most convenient.   If anyone has a preference for F2F, speak up now.   - The output of the BRM would be a list of changes to ODF 1.2 that are agreed on by us and SC34.    These changes could then be balloted in parallel as Approved Errata in OASIS and Corrigenda in SC34. - SC34 has meeting notification requirements.  Scheduling a BRM, including one conducted via teleconference, requires 2 months notice.   So our initial task is to estimate how long it will take for us to review the ballot comments, agree on proposed editing instructions and submit this to SC34.  Preparing these proposed editing instructions might require some back-and-forth if the comments are not perfectly clear.  As soon as we have this estimate we should let SC34 know so they can schedule the BRM.   Regards, -Rob


  • 3.  RE: [office] Notes from SC34/WG6 meeting; Next steps for ISO ODF 1.2

    Posted 09-26-2014 05:32
    Hi,

    thanks to Chris and Rob to take already
    actions on this topic.

    I will put a discussion on the received
    PAS submission comments on our proposed agenda for our next TC call on
    Monday.
    Thus, I am asking all TC members to
    have a look at these comments.


    Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards
    Oliver-Rainer Wittmann

    --
    Advisory Software Engineer
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    IBM Deutschland
    Beim Strohhause 17
    20097 Hamburg
    Phone: +49-40-6389-1415
    E-Mail: orwitt@de.ibm.com
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH / Vorsitzende
    des Aufsichtsrats: Martina Koederitz
    Geschäftsführung: Dirk Wittkopp
    Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen / Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart,
    HRB 243294



    From:      
      Chris Rae <Chris.Rae@microsoft.com>
    To:      
      "robert_weir@us.ibm.com"
    <robert_weir@us.ibm.com>, OpenDocument TC List <office@lists.oasis-open.org>
    Cc:      
      Jamie Clark <jamie.clark@oasis-open.org>
    Date:      
      26.09.2014 04:43
    Subject:    
        RE: [office]
    Notes from SC34/WG6 meeting; Next steps for ISO ODF 1.2
    Sent by:    
        <office@lists.oasis-open.org>




    I’ve added these to JIRA
    – the titles are my summary of each comment, but the complete comment
    text and any proposed resolution is included in the body of the bug.
     
    I left the resolution date
    blank for the moment, and logged them as applying to “ODF 1.2”.
     
    Chris
     
    From: office@lists.oasis-open.org
    [ mailto:office@lists.oasis-open.org ]
    On Behalf Of robert_weir@us.ibm.com
    Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2014 21:38
    To: OpenDocument TC List
    Cc: Jamie Clark
    Subject: [office] Notes from SC34/WG6 meeting; Next steps for ISO ODF
    1.2
     
    We had a teleconference meeting of WG6 last
    night (this morning in Japan where SC34 was meeting).  Chris Rae and
    I attended for the ODF TC.   We briefly discussed the results of the
    PAS ballot and the next steps.

    In summary:

    -- We (OASIS as the PAS submittor via the ODF TC) need to write up a response
    to each of the comments received, saying what our recommendation is.  
     Actions might be to fix in an errata (if it fits within the kinds
    of changes permitted in OASIS Approved Errata), push off until ODF 1.3
    (where more substantive changes can be made), disagree with the comment
    altogether, etc.   IMHO we should copy each of the comments into JIRA
    and resolve them via our normal workflow.


    - Once we have such a "disposition of comments report" we would
    submit it to SC34, probably via Patrick.


    - Then a Ballot Resolution Meeting (BRM) would occur.   This could
    be a face-to-face meeting or, because the comment list is short, a teleconference.
      To me it sounded like a teleconference BRM would be the most convenient.
      If anyone has a preference for F2F, speak up now.  


    - The output of the BRM would be a list of changes to ODF 1.2 that are
    agreed on by us and SC34.    These changes could then be balloted
    in parallel as Approved Errata in OASIS and Corrigenda in SC34.


    - SC34 has meeting notification requirements.  Scheduling a BRM, including
    one conducted via teleconference, requires 2 months notice.   So our
    initial task is to estimate how long it will take for us to review the
    ballot comments, agree on proposed editing instructions and submit this
    to SC34.  Preparing these proposed editing instructions might require
    some back-and-forth if the comments are not perfectly clear.  As soon
    as we have this estimate we should let SC34 know so they can schedule the
    BRM.  

    Regards,

    -Rob




  • 4.  RE: [office] Notes from SC34/WG6 meeting; Next steps for ISO ODF 1.2

    Posted 09-29-2014 12:40
    Hi,

    Thx to Chris to add the received comments
    from the ODF 1.2 Pas Submission to JIRA as individual issues - OFFICE-3865...OFFICE-3872

    I had a short look at these JIRA issues
    and add corresponding components information.
    I am missing one of the comments received
    from the ODF 1.2 Pas Submission. The one from NC JP regarding section 5.5
    of ODF 1.2, Part 1. It is the second one on document 'ISO_IEC DIS 26300-1_JISC.doc'
    which had been provided by Jamie Clark.

    Do I have overseen it or is it missing
    in JIRA?



    Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards
    Oliver-Rainer Wittmann

    --
    Advisory Software Engineer
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    IBM Deutschland
    Beim Strohhause 17
    20097 Hamburg
    Phone: +49-40-6389-1415
    E-Mail: orwitt@de.ibm.com
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH / Vorsitzende
    des Aufsichtsrats: Martina Koederitz
    Geschäftsführung: Dirk Wittkopp
    Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen / Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart,
    HRB 243294



    From:      
      Chris Rae <Chris.Rae@microsoft.com>
    To:      
      "robert_weir@us.ibm.com"
    <robert_weir@us.ibm.com>, OpenDocument TC List <office@lists.oasis-open.org>
    Cc:      
      Jamie Clark <jamie.clark@oasis-open.org>
    Date:      
      26.09.2014 04:43
    Subject:    
        RE: [office]
    Notes from SC34/WG6 meeting; Next steps for ISO ODF 1.2
    Sent by:    
        <office@lists.oasis-open.org>




    I’ve added these to JIRA
    – the titles are my summary of each comment, but the complete comment
    text and any proposed resolution is included in the body of the bug.
     
    I left the resolution date
    blank for the moment, and logged them as applying to “ODF 1.2”.
     
    Chris
     
    From: office@lists.oasis-open.org
    [ mailto:office@lists.oasis-open.org ]
    On Behalf Of robert_weir@us.ibm.com
    Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2014 21:38
    To: OpenDocument TC List
    Cc: Jamie Clark
    Subject: [office] Notes from SC34/WG6 meeting; Next steps for ISO ODF
    1.2
     
    We had a teleconference meeting of WG6 last
    night (this morning in Japan where SC34 was meeting).  Chris Rae and
    I attended for the ODF TC.   We briefly discussed the results of the
    PAS ballot and the next steps.

    In summary:

    -- We (OASIS as the PAS submittor via the ODF TC) need to write up a response
    to each of the comments received, saying what our recommendation is.  
     Actions might be to fix in an errata (if it fits within the kinds
    of changes permitted in OASIS Approved Errata), push off until ODF 1.3
    (where more substantive changes can be made), disagree with the comment
    altogether, etc.   IMHO we should copy each of the comments into JIRA
    and resolve them via our normal workflow.


    - Once we have such a "disposition of comments report" we would
    submit it to SC34, probably via Patrick.


    - Then a Ballot Resolution Meeting (BRM) would occur.   This could
    be a face-to-face meeting or, because the comment list is short, a teleconference.
      To me it sounded like a teleconference BRM would be the most convenient.
      If anyone has a preference for F2F, speak up now.  


    - The output of the BRM would be a list of changes to ODF 1.2 that are
    agreed on by us and SC34.    These changes could then be balloted
    in parallel as Approved Errata in OASIS and Corrigenda in SC34.


    - SC34 has meeting notification requirements.  Scheduling a BRM, including
    one conducted via teleconference, requires 2 months notice.   So our
    initial task is to estimate how long it will take for us to review the
    ballot comments, agree on proposed editing instructions and submit this
    to SC34.  Preparing these proposed editing instructions might require
    some back-and-forth if the comments are not perfectly clear.  As soon
    as we have this estimate we should let SC34 know so they can schedule the
    BRM.  

    Regards,

    -Rob




  • 5.  Re: [office] Notes from SC34/WG6 meeting; Next steps for ISO ODF 1.2

    Posted 09-26-2014 04:13
    Thanks Rob and Chris.  Safe travel -- I will report back to you directly on guidance I have from JTC 1 on this.  Let's coordinate early next week?   Regards  Jamie     James Bryce Clark, General Counsel OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society https://www.oasis-open.org/staff     www.twitter.com/JamieXML http://t.sina.cn/jamiexml http://www.slideshare.net/jamiexml http://facebook.com/oasis.open On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 5:38 AM, < robert_weir@us.ibm.com > wrote: We had a teleconference meeting of WG6 last night (this morning in Japan where SC34 was meeting).  Chris Rae and I attended for the ODF TC.   We briefly discussed the results of the PAS ballot and the next steps. In summary: -- We (OASIS as the PAS submittor via the ODF TC) need to write up a response to each of the comments received, saying what our recommendation is.    Actions might be to fix in an errata (if it fits within the kinds of changes permitted in OASIS Approved Errata), push off until ODF 1.3 (where more substantive changes can be made), disagree with the comment altogether, etc.   IMHO we should copy each of the comments into JIRA and resolve them via our normal workflow. - Once we have such a "disposition of comments report" we would submit it to SC34, probably via Patrick. - Then a Ballot Resolution Meeting (BRM) would occur.   This could be a face-to-face meeting or, because the comment list is short, a teleconference.   To me it sounded like a teleconference BRM would be the most convenient.   If anyone has a preference for F2F, speak up now.   - The output of the BRM would be a list of changes to ODF 1.2 that are agreed on by us and SC34.    These changes could then be balloted in parallel as Approved Errata in OASIS and Corrigenda in SC34. - SC34 has meeting notification requirements.  Scheduling a BRM, including one conducted via teleconference, requires 2 months notice.   So our initial task is to estimate how long it will take for us to review the ballot comments, agree on proposed editing instructions and submit this to SC34.  Preparing these proposed editing instructions might require some back-and-forth if the comments are not perfectly clear.  As soon as we have this estimate we should let SC34 know so they can schedule the BRM.   Regards, -Rob