[dsdl-discuss] Re: Options re timetable

OK Francis, so lets call their bluff and abandon Part 9 for lack of public
interest

Martin

----- Original Message -----
From: "Francis Cave" <francis@franciscave.com>
To: <dsdl-discuss@dsdl.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2006 11:48 AM
Subject: [dsdl-discuss] Re: Options re timetable

> I agree with Alex. I think it would be wrong to "shoot the messenger". The
> fact is that staff at ISO Central Secretariat are simply implementing ISO
> policy for which they are not personally to blame. If we don't like the
> policy, we have to argue for a change through our National Bodies.
>
> Quite frankly, the reason I'm late with editing DSDL Part 9 has nothing to
> do with either ODF or OOXML and has everything to do with the fact that
this
> Part hasn't generated much interest - so maybe ISO have a point. Yes, I
need
> to get a revised draft out for discussion and second CD ballot, but Part 9
> also needs a commitment from someone to develop a pilot implementation in
> Xerces or some other well-known DTD parser. Without that commitment, I may
> be able to steer the text through to IS... but what for?
>
> Francis Cave
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dsdl-discuss-bounce@dsdl.org
> > [mailto:dsdl-discuss-bounce@dsdl.org]On Behalf Of Alex Brown
> > Sent: 31 October 2006 11:32
> > To: dsdl-discuss@dsdl.org
> > Subject: [dsdl-discuss] Re: Options re timetable
> >
> >
> > Martin, All,
> >
> > Might it not be more politic to ask them to cut us some slack? ... The
> > fast tracking is only a contributory factor to the perceived slowness of
> > standardisation. The real problem is that we're a small volunteer force,
> > with other commitments. If OOXML was taken elsewhere, would it really
> > allow us to keep to ISO's (probably unrealistic) schedule?
> >
> > I think it might be better to point out (as you did to Ken) that we're
> > doing good work, we're stretched, and we're the crucial WG through which
> > such things as ODF/OOXML need to progress. We could point out that DSDL
> > even "as is" is already a basis for ODF and the re-drafting of OOXML.
> >
> > In other words I think our position should be "we're special - support
> > us". I think we will benefit, in the long run, from the attention OOXML
> > (etc) generates.
> >
> > If that approach doesn't work, we could then introduce a more militant
> > note along the lines you suggest ....
> >
> > - Alex.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: dsdl-discuss-bounce@dsdl.org
> > > [mailto:dsdl-discuss-bounce@dsdl.org] On Behalf Of Martin Bryan
> > > Sent: 31 October 2006 07:56
> > > To: dsdl-discuss@dsdl.org
> > > Subject: [dsdl-discuss] Options re timetable
> > >
> > > Dear DSDLers
> > >
> > > Given the pressure we are currently being put under by
> > > national standards bodies and the ISO Central Secretariat to
> > > deliver the delayed parts of DSDL I propose we send the
> > > following unambiguous message to ISO CS and BSI, with a copy
> > > to Microsoft:
> > >
> > > Until such time as SC34 WG1 are able to complete their work
> > > on ISO 19757 to the satisfaction of national standards bodies
> > > and the ISO Central Secretariat we will be unable to waste
> > > any more time discussing fast-track standards, such as ODF,
> > > or advising those preparing to use the fast-track procedure,
> > > such as OOXML, which have taken up far too much of our
> > > valuable discussion and work time over the past 18 months.
> > >
> > > Anyone object to me sending this?
> > >
> > > Martin
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > DSDL members discussion list
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe, please send a message with the command
> > > "unsubscribe" to dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org
> > > (mailto:dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org?Subject=unsubscribe)
> > >
> > >
> > --
> > DSDL members discussion list
> >
> > To unsubscribe, please send a message with the
> > command "unsubscribe" to dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org
> > (mailto:dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org?Subject=subscribe)
> >
>
> --
> DSDL members discussion list
>
> To unsubscribe, please send a message with the
> command "unsubscribe" to dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org
> (mailto:dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org?Subject=unsubscribe)
>
>

--
DSDL members discussion list
To unsubscribe, please send a message with the
command  "unsubscribe" to dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org
(mailto:dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org?Subject=unsubscribe)