PWG Mail Archive: RE: PWG> "Draft Standard" is an

RE: PWG> "Draft Standard" is an oxymoron

From: Wagner,William (WWagner@NetSilicon.com)
Date: Fri Jan 31 2003 - 14:53:35 EST

  • Next message: Harry Lewis: "RE: PWG> "Draft Standard" is an oxymoron"

    Tom,

    I suggest we separate the questions of naming (which has had some specific problem cited) and process.

    a. You indicated that the word "draft" was troublesome used for both working and standard at the same time.

    b. At the f2f, the PSI group indicated that the titling of the different standards levels suggested very tentative documents to their superiors, and not worthy of trial implementation.

    I also thought about the product designations of alpha, beta and final and possibly being appropriate for the PWG standards. They do seem to reflect the proper sense of development state and should correlate to managers' understandings.\

    Bill Wagner

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Hastings, Tom N [mailto:hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com]
    Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 2:38 PM
    To: Wu, Michael HDi; pwg@pwg.org
    Subject: RE: PWG> "Draft Standard" is an oxymoron

    So are you suggesting we can solve the two usages of the word "draft" in our
    PWG process:

    "Working Draft"
    versus
    "Draft Standard"

    by changing "Draft Standard" to "Final Beta Standard" or "Public Beta
    Standard"?

    Thanks,
    Tom

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Wu, Michael HDi [mailto:Michael.Wu@heidelberg.com]
    Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 11:10
    To: Hastings, Tom N; pwg@pwg.org
    Subject: RE: PWG> "Draft Standard" is an oxymoron

    "Draft Standard" look like a "Final Beta" or "Public Beta". I don't see why
    we cannot use it.

    Michael Wu
      
    Software Engineering Expertise Center
    Heidelberg Digital L.L.C.

    2600 Manitou Road
    Rochester, NY. 14624
      
    Office: 585.512.8715
    Fax: 585.512.8076
      
    < mailto:Michael.Wu@Heidelberg.com

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Hastings, Tom N [mailto:hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com]
    Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 6:25 PM
    To: pwg@pwg.org
    Subject: PWG> "Draft Standard" is an oxymoron

    Here is why I think that "Draft Standard" is an oxymoron. Draft is too
    fleeting. Standard is meant to be more stable.

    So I looked up the word "Draft" in the dictionary. Webster's Seventh
    Collegiate Dictionary says:

    "a preliminary sketch, outline, or version".

    We all use the word "draft" (or "working draft") to mean the document that
    we update rapidly to get to a version that we all consider stable enough to
    have a Last Call.

    So one of the appealing suggestions made at today's call was to just remove
    section 3.4 Draft Standard and have only 3.4 Proposed Standard and 3.6
    Standard. Both have to have a series of drafts to be reviewed to lead up to
    being an approved Proposed Standard or an approved Standard. And both need
    to have a draft that is considered good enough to both trying a Last Call
    and then the Last Call has to actually pass.

    I think much of our trouble is terminology, so fixing the terminology, and
    deleting a step seems to be a good thing to do and is NOT abandoning the
    process or overturning turnips.

    Tom

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jan 31 2003 - 14:53:55 EST