W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-forms-editor@w3.org > April 2007

Re: Formal Objection: publication of XForms 1.1 as LCWD

From: John Boyer <boyerj@ca.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 16:26:44 -0700
To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Cc: public-forms@w3.org, public-forms-request@w3.org, www-forms-editor@w3.org, www-forms@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF3B3B18BD.6079F853-ON882572BA.007C15E0-882572BA.0080CBAB@ca.ibm.com>
Hi Bjoern,

First, I think you bcc'd www-forms again, which I politely asked you not 
to do.  If you didn't, please let me know so I can ask someone at W3C to 
investigate the issue.  Either way, I've corrected the problem by adding 
www-forms to the cc list of this response.

Second, I am aware that your concerns are similar to those raised in the 
past, which is why I provided information on the significant results the 
working group has achieved that should, upon reasonable evaluation, go a 
long way toward assuaging your concerns. 

Third, my prior messages to you are not rhetoric.  That you called your 
message a formal objection does not make it so.  Rather like me calling 
this message a shoe or a spoon does not make it become so.  It is 
particularly ironic that your messages are fairly devoid of observance of 
W3C process whilst simultaneously complaining about Forms WG observance of 
W3C process.  The Forms WG does its level best to follow W3C process and 
is also highly responsive to its public community.

Fourth, I believe that there is indeed work for you to do as a follow-on 
to this thread.  It is work which I asked of you in the prior emails, 
which is unfortunate because I am asking you to help fix the problem, not 
just the blame.  That is what will decrease tensions.

I do not understand why you believe that issuing a last call comment is 
threatening to the Forms WG.  Last call is a time of increased scrutiny; 
it recognizes that human beings are not perfect throughout the whole 
process and that someone's issue may have been missed.  But based on how 
the XForms 1.1 feature set was derived and the 94 pages of errata, I think 
you cannot reasonably substantiate the claim that comments are routinely 
ignored.  It is not the norm, plain and simple.

Finally, please understand that we are good human beings who are doing our 
best to catch and address all the issues.  I apologize we missed your 
QName but not NCName issue, your issue with the example of Appendix F, and 
any other issues you have raised that were missed.  At this point, to help 
us manage the workload, I would ask that you please file any and all know 
issues as last call comments for XForms 1.1.  I also understand you really 
wanted your submission feature to be included as a committed requirement 
for XForms 1.1; we could not do so, for reasons explained, but we believe 
your feature to be available and ask you to review it to confirm.

John M. Boyer, Ph.D.
STSM: Lotus Forms Architect and Researcher
Chair, W3C Forms Working Group
Workplace, Portal and Collaboration Software
IBM Victoria Software Lab
E-Mail: boyerj@ca.ibm.com 

Blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/JohnBoyer





Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> 
Sent by: public-forms-request@w3.org
04/11/2007 03:12 PM

To
John Boyer/CanWest/IBM@IBMCA
cc
public-forms@w3.org, www-forms-editor@w3.org
Subject
Re: Formal Objection: publication of XForms 1.1 as LCWD







* John Boyer wrote:
>[...]

You have already made clear that you "will not be speaking to the
director about" my formal objection, and now you are casting doubt
whether I am even eligible to register the objection in the first
place.

The concerns I raised and the suggestion I made are not different
in nature from what I wrote to you in February 2006. I chose not
to put that on the public record to make it easier for you to come
into compliance with the W3C Process without making it look like
you are just giving in to outside pressure. You chose to ignore it.

I am not interested in discussing only the technical points of my
technical issues as you recommend. I am interested in XForms being
developed in an environment that invites outside expertise in order
to minimize the amount and severity of problems with it, and maxi-
mize the consensus around it.

Engaging with you in technical discussion about my issues at this
point and in this thread would send two messages. Firstly, the
Forms Working Group will ignore one's feedback unless threatend
during Last Call, and secondly, all the other feedback the Working
Group ignored up to this point can continue to be ignored.

Many of your arguments, rhetorics, and interpretations of the W3C
Process, like your doubt whether I am eligible to engage in this
discussion at all, serve nothing but to increase tension.

I hope from the points above you can understand that the sole pur-
pose of my Formal Objection is to make sure The Director is aware
of how XForms 1.1 came to be and, as a neutral third party, settle
this dispute. You rather resolved it yourself in your favour, so
there is nothing left for me to add to this thread.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ 
Received on Wednesday, 11 April 2007 23:27:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 10 June 2009 18:12:15 GMT