2008/7/21 Peter Dolding <>:
> Please pardon my 99 but I think we need it in there. If the document
> become unreadable to the people doing the testing and producing the
> reports it becomes just another nightmare document. Simpler the
> document more likely it can be translated to other languages as need
> and keep its meaning.
I hope the proposal is clear Peter. If there is wording you don't feel
is clear let me know where. I agree it should be simple and clear.
> 12.* Creation of central lists of documented and non documented
> extensions to ODF found that are not part of the standard. Until
> equal is provided by the ODF standard body.
I'm -1 on this. Simply because it's out of scope as I see it.
The TC should work on the latest Oasis standard. A central
registry isn't in that.
> 13.* Implementer usable testing systems.(Complete Test of Standard)
Would you explain what you mean by this please? In the scope
I proposed that the TC is not about writing software.
> 14.* End User Standard Conformance Verification.(Acid Tests)
This is where I want help. I want a clear definition of acid test
that we can use as a deliverable. This wording seems to be
the same as deliverable 3, with a slight change in wording.
regards
--
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk
