Lists Home |
Date Index |
I'm only on the digest of xml-dev, and don't always read it, but have
heard through the grapevine that there was some discussion on this topic.
OASIS will be rolling out a software application from Kavi that provides
functionality for our TCs, including membership roster management, mail
lists, scheduling, balloting, action items, etc. As part of the
transitioning from our current mail lists to those run through the Kavi
system I'm doing some consistency checking of TC information such as
charters, IPR declarations, etc. before I move the information to the
As part of this consistency checking I'm being reminded that a number of
our TCs are using their public comment lists for public discussion. The
OASIS TC Process specifies that each TC be provided with a mail list for
the purpose of accepting public comment on the work of the TC, but that
that list is not to be used for discussion. (See
with our current mail lists the enforcement of this was up to the TC
chair, with Kavi we will be able to have this enforced by the system.
I followed up with the chairs of a couple of our TCs where the level of
public discussion has been a problem and suggested that they begin
moving their discussions from the comment list to the private TC members
lists. Granted, this will have the effect of making it more difficult
for non OASIS members to participate in the work of the TC, but this is
what is required by our process. OASIS goes to great lengths to ensure
that anyone who is interested in the work of our TCs to participate to
some extent, either by joining OASIS and the TC or by reading the
publicly viewable archives and web pages and sending comments to the
TCs. (I'm not aware of any other standards organizations that are so open.)
Nothing at OASIS is done behind closed doors, but we must also require
that the members of the TC who are doing the technical work and making
the decisions are members of OASIS; to do otherwise would diminish the
value of membership in the consortium, and as it is the members of the
consortium who provide the resources to support this work through the
payment of their membership dues it is not fair to them that other,
non-paying participants would have the same rights.
So, in summary, there is absolutely no change of policy here, just the
new ability to use a system to enforce what previosuly we left up to the
chairs to enforce.
>>> Re: [xml-dev] KAVI
>>> "Chiusano Joseph" <email@example.com>
>>> Fri, 07 Feb 2003 09:41:32 -0500
>>> "Bullard Claude L (Len)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>>>Thanks - without seeing the note you refer to I would not be equipped to
>>>"Bullard, Claude L (Len)" wrote:
>>>>A note from a chair of a list I participate on.
>>>>One side effect is to limit the participation of
>>>>non-OASIS members regardless of their depth of
>>>>participation or contribution. That can be a
>>>>serious handicap to the niche efforts. It
>>>>would be sad to see the innovations that are
>>>>born of research and experimentation have to
>>>>move to Yahoo.
>>>>I understand the difficulties of constraining
>>>>open lists. I also understand the advantages.
>>>>Far too often what has initially looked like
>>>>yet another lunatic-fringe element has proven
>>>>to be a seminal and important source of ideas
>>>>even where they are in conflict with the immediate
>>>>goals of the corporate membership.
>>>>From: Chiusano Joseph [mailto:email@example.com]
>>>>It seems there is
>>>>some push to restrict discussion on the comments
>>>>lists and to move serious discussion to the
>>>>restricted discussion lists.
>>>>Can you please elaborate more as to why you feel this way?
Karl F. Best
Vice President, OASIS
+1 978.667.5115 x206