On Wednesday 2. July 2008 07:44:16 Dave Pawson wrote:
> > Do you have any other reasons for wanting this section in?
>
> (2) A preliminary statement of scope for the TC whose formation the
> list is intended to discuss.
>
> Without a definition of what is to be tested for compliance, we are unable
> to deliver the scope.
Agreed, a scope is required. We need to have something concrete. We focus on
ODF, thats scope already.
But that does not answer my question; do you have any reason to *remove* from
scope ODF specifications that are expected, but not yet finalized?
If so, do you have any other reasons then the one you gave before to try to
convince others of your point?
--
Thomas Zander
