tgf — archive

FW: OASIS STANDARD BALLOT RESULT

From: John Borras
To: [email protected]
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 08:53:00 -0000

To assist our deliberations attached is one of many emails sent during the last few days. This was a response from TC Admin to some of the complaints raised during the ballot. John From: John Borras [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 26 April 2013 08:54 To: 'Tgf' Subject: OASIS STANDARD BALLOT RESULT Importance: High Colleagues The ballot has now closed and the final votes cast were 60 (82% of total votes cast) in favour and 13 (18% of total votes cast) against. That means we have Conditional Approval according to the TC Process Handbook and now have 3 choices as shown below on how to move forward. The purpose of the TC call next Wednesday will be to review the outcome of the ballot, the comments raised and decide on which of the 3 options we wish to follow. For those of you who will not be able to make the TC call it would be very helpful if you could post a note to the TC list before the call setting out any views you have on the outcome of the ballot and your preference of the way forward. One of the major comments raised during the ballot concerned the Conformance Clauses and you will find the current guidance on these at http://docs.oasis-open.org/templates/TCHandbook/ConformanceGuidelines.html . If you have chance please take a look as we need to reflect on this guidance in making our decisions. Regards John Borras Chair OASIS TGF Technical Committee m. +(0)44 7976 157745 Skype: gov3john www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=tgf --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Extract from TC Process Handbook: “However, if negative votes are cast amounting to less than 25 percent of the votes that have been cast, the TC shall be notified of the negative votes, after which the TC shall have 30 days to take one of the following actions by Resolution of a Special Majority Vote: (a) request the TC Administrator to approve the specification as submitted despite the negative votes; (b) withdraw the submission entirely; or (c) submit an amended specification, in which case the amended submission shall be considered as if it were a new submission, except that information regarding previous votes and any disposition of comments received in previous votes shall accompany the amended submission. If the originating TC upon notification of negative votes takes no formal action within the 30 days allocated for consideration of the results, then the specification shall not become an OASIS Standard. Failure of a ballot for any reason shall not prevent a later version of the same specification from being submitted again as specified in this section. ” --- Begin Message --- From : "Chet Ensign" <[email protected]> To : "Paul Fremantle" <[email protected]> Date : Wed, 24 Apr 2013 14:39:56 +0100 Good morning Paul (and chairs), Well, good morning here in the US east coast anyway. Thanks for your note - it has triggered some thoughts: - "or the TC process needs to be modified to support this kind of work product" - I plan to raise this idea with the Board's process committee. I'm thrilled that work like this and PMRM and ID-Cloud and other non-code projects are at OASIS. We do need to consider modifications to make the fit better. Not sure what those might be yet - I'll be looking at practices in other organizations to see what other models are out there. - "three fo the five statements of use do not follow the prescription..." - The wording of SoUs being submitted to TCs was raised with me last month (I think) and since then I have been working with TCs to make sure that wording is proper. If I went back before that, I would find SoUs in a number of TCs that one way or the other didn't conform to some detail. As a general principal, I don't make it a practice to go back and retroactively change my practice with TCs. In my judgement, the SoUs for TGF are within the scope of the prevailing practice of the time. - " reading the TC conformance clauses and the part of the process I quoted, I believe that it has stretched the meaning of those to limits..." - hence again the need to review the TC Process to look for opportunities for improvement. Let me also say that the TGF TC has worked patiently and persistently with me to conform to anything I asked of them. Their work complies with the requirements of the TC Process to my satisfaction. I really want to see OASIS be a good home for work like this. It is needed. I really like the way David Webber phrased it in another message: " OASIS needs tools beyond middleware XML that inform and empower organizations to build better processes for developing solutions. The marketplace is looking to standards organizations to provide this guidance." I think we can be a great platform for work like that and this debate has really helped to elevate the issues that we need to consider so that we can make the fit work better. Again Paul, thanks for your note. It has helped me crystalize my thinking. Best, /chet On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Paul Fremantle < [email protected] > wrote: Peter I understand the challenges that you went through and they lead me to question whether: * either, the particular work product was not ideal for OASIS, * or the OASIS TC process needs to be modified to support this kind of work product. Certainly reading the TC conformance clauses and the part of the process I quoted, I believe that it has stretched the meaning of those to limits which I don't think were intended when the process was written. For example, I note that three of the five statements of use do not follow the prescription of " stating whether its use included the interoperation of multiple independent implementations.". Paul On 24 April 2013 02:22, Peter F Brown < [email protected] > wrote: Paul, It should be no surprise. CS Transform handed over their original work to the TC as a formal “Contribution” that served to bootstrap the whole endeavor. Several people with whom they worked wanted to be parties to the work’s further development in OASIS. I think that it is quite common for new TC’s who bring new members to OASIS to be involved with a key sponsor of the work. The important thing is that any OASIS member can join any TC – and many did, like myself, who had no prior knowledge of or affiliation with CS Transform. I found the work challenging in terms of the OASIS process – which is historically designed to work with technical and directly implementable specifications (and which possibly is at the origin of some of Patrick’s concerns – but we ensured that the process was respected in every detail. The proposal may not be to everyone’s liking but to claim as Patrick does that we have somehow “broken the rules” is simply not true. Thanks for taking a detailed look at the work and I hope that you can support it Best regards, Peter From: Paul Fremantle [mailto: [email protected] ] Sent: Tuesday, 23 April, 2013 17:53 To: Patrick Durusau Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [chairs] TGF Minutes Report One thing that I find interesting is in relation to this aspect of the TC process. The TC process states: " " Statement of Use ", with respect to a Committee Specification, is a written statement that a party has successfully used or implemented that specification in accordance with all or some of its conformance clauses specified in Section 2.18 , identifying those clauses that apply, and stating whether its use included the interoperation of multiple independent implementations." With regard to the five statements of use: One of the SOU's comes from CS Transform (whose CEO is one of the editors). Two more come from clients of CS Transform. Two are not linked (as far as I know) to CS Transform. In addition the Chair is a retired employee of CS Transform. If this was an interoperability standard with a requirement for multiple independent implementations I would be questioning the independence of at least 3 of the 5 statements of use. But its not. Paul On 24 April 2013 00:23, Patrick Durusau < [email protected] > wrote: ----- BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE ----- Hash: SHA1 Greetings! I did promise to review the TGF minutes for discussion of conformance. As part of that review, note that file: TCminutes2013_02_21.rtf has the correct date but the document has the header: "Meeting 21 March 2013" but refers to the minutes of 17th of January for approval. So the file name is correct, but the heading in the file is wrong. The TGF TC did discuss conformance clauses, but in 2011. Look at IssuesList-2011-12-14.xlsx to find the notes. While the wording of the conformance clauses is discussed, the issues that I raised of allowing *any* model were not. For the various posts following my initial one, I would note that no one had addressed the merits of my objection. As several of the posts have made clear, the timing of these objections is not an issue. The TC would have dismissed them and we would be exactly where we are today. Only the vote of OASIS members controls the quality of OASIS standards. Are you an "any model" OASIS member? If not, vote no. Hope everyone is having a great day! Patrick - -- Patrick Durusau [email protected] Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Former Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34 Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau ----- BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE ----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRdxfqAAoJEBerZNWIP55s6KgIAKkKqRiimhgfqOSav76eGr1d IDBrkP6dfp33YoMNMfPCTgd6+4QyT67Ai5f+6Y27y0wkcSWWKYxiLFP0LgDT2Hn4 8lEUuMCzq88DdHtZLvIp878yLPKVJH9whLF+DIYhUIMQm0EAU1+i44jmA/wlFsdA iOi5Rl798z2CKEI9LD0LsRcCyVgcIwLZp+/3B+Srv6rA/RirHAyPYGc/YYpM62VS dK5QyPM8jojQlMIHRrVT31Kxsb4n9yMfYs0CLvnnyVJvifn2Ng+kDr5PRMi4fFGU WOpQ+Ou11TSSRghJ7XVrXxIFEqjunV7E/RT/sgShOrb2nX4YfTOCJwvk6HYBCNw= =DN3Z ----- END PGP SIGNATURE ----- -- Paul Fremantle CTO and Co-Founder, WSO2 OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair, VP, Apache Synapse UK: +44 207 096 0336 US: +1 646 595 7614 blog: http://pzf.fremantle.org twitter.com/pzfreo [email protected] wso2.com Lean Enterprise Middleware Disclaimer: This communication may contain privileged or other confidential information and is intended exclusively for the addressee/s. If you are not the intended recipient/s, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please reply to the sender indicating that fact and delete the copy you received and in addition, you should not print, copy, retransmit, disseminate, or otherwise use the information contained in this communication. Internet communications cannot be guaranteed to be timely, secure, error or virus-free. The sender does not accept liability for any errors or omissions. -- Paul Fremantle CTO and Co-Founder, WSO2 OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair, VP, Apache Synapse UK: +44 207 096 0336 US: +1 646 595 7614 blog: http://pzf.fremantle.org twitter.com/pzfreo [email protected] wso2.com Lean Enterprise Middleware Disclaimer: This communication may contain privileged or other confidential information and is intended exclusively for the addressee/s. If you are not the intended recipient/s, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please reply to the sender indicating that fact and delete the copy you received and in addition, you should not print, copy, retransmit, disseminate, or otherwise use the information contained in this communication. Internet communications cannot be guaranteed to be timely, secure, error or virus-free. The sender does not accept liability for any errors or omissions. -- /chet ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393 Check your work using the Support Request Submission Checklist at http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/47248/tc-admin-submission-checklist.html TC Administration information and support is available at http://www.oasis-open.org/resources/tcadmin Follow OASIS on: LinkedIn: http://linkd.in/OASISopen Twitter: http://twitter.com/OASISopen Facebook: http://facebook.com/oasis.open --- End Message ---