On Tuesday 02 Nov 2010 22:52:31 Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
Le Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:29:38 +0100,
Monfort Florian <firstname.lastname@example.org> a écrit :
Le mardi 02 novembre 2010 à 09:27 +0000, Ian a écrit :
I'm going to suscribe to the French mailing list ( as I am
French lol ) and I think there are some people who could be
interested of being representative for France.
Should I talk about it ? Or is this something we should wait
TDF to be a legal entity ?
Je ne pense pas que vous avez besoin de retard. Il n'y a pas
beaucoup de temps si les délégués veulent obtenir du financement
pour la réunion par leur Agence nationale de l'UE.S'il vous
plaît diffuser aussi largement que possible. Cela va m'aider si
ces e-mail intéressés moi si je sais que la mesure de l'intérêt.
I think it's perhaps safe to remind everyone that this
"certification" is not exactly a Document Foundation certification.
First, we're in the process of establishing the foundation; second,
we need to be working on a certification programme and I am not the
only here, obviously, who thinks it's an essential matter :-) but
we need to be working on it and give the time to do that. While I'm
sure Ian has a lot of input on this, I would like to remind
everyone here that the meeting Ian organizes is not done on behalf
of the Document Foundation; as productive as it might be. I would
have loved to join myself, but am running out of time.
I think you have missed the point, define "on behalf of"
Read back over the mails. It seems "on behalf of" to me, not wholly
of course, because it takes a commercial organisation such as TLM to
get this established and that has be self sustaining. SUN wasn't
selling StarOffice or Java or Solaris "on behalf of" OOo, yet that
funded OOo. Novell doesn't sell SLE "on behalf of" OOo yet that
funds contribution to LibO.
OOo bureaucracy rejected the opportunity of being involved in the
INGOTs programme quite a few years back. The foundation needs
funding, INGOTs has the infrastructure in place to generate such
funding. If we were to sit around waiting for an In House
Certification Certification the funding that would be generated by
that (if any after costs were covered) wouldn't arrive till the next
decade given the glacial pace of OOo Certs development and the
certification would probably be out of date and not subject to
rigorous moderation in any case The foundation does not and will not
have the resources to apply rigorous Quality control to such a
certification in any case.
INGOTs assessment criteria are OfQual accredited, frankly, I doubt
that LibreO will ever have the clout to achieve anything like that.
The certification and assessment programme, because of that
accreditation, undergoes continuous moderation and Quality Assurance
by Education Professionals to ensure that it maintains the highest
Developers are hard to come by, there aren't the numbers, however the
community can come up with a sizable number of people who have the
capability of becoming INGOTs Assessors/ Assessor Trainers in their
local areas. The project does not need to be working on it's "own"
certification (not straight away anyway) when a robust, proven,
rigorously moderated Assessment and Certification programme is being
handed to the project on a platter.
Ian and his team have done all the work and have the systems in
place. LibreO has the geographical spread and a growing community
and hence the ability to generate funding for TDF. What better way
to fund the foundation than through the efforts of the Community
running grass roots certification programmes on behalf of their local
community, on behalf of themselves and INGOTs and "on behalf of" the
ps: Yes I am biased so sue me. :)
Impressum (Legal Info)
: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our trademark policy