RE: [chairs] Membership for open source implementers

["Gabe Wachob" <gabe.wachob@amsoft.net>]

Sorry for not spelling it out - all the IP disclosure rules would still
apply to such a member. 

And I haven't looked at the membership rules recently - it does appear that
the invited expert provision is gone!

In any case, all I was proposing was that the open source implementer could
be *invited* to participate, cost-free, with all the requirements and
obligations that would to apply to an individual member. 

	-Gabe

> -----Original Message-----
> From: G. Ken Holman [mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 2:44 PM
> To: chairs@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [chairs] Membership for open source implementers
> 
> I'm not so quick to just let any project
> committer participate unless they are first
> obliged to adhere to the OASIS membership agreement.
> 
> I don't think money is the issue ... I think
> intellectual property rights are more
> important.  Contributions to the committees have
> to be unencumbered and the OASIS membership agreement attempts to address
> this.
> 
> Preventing people from just "joining our list and
> contributing" is not at all absurd.  As a
> committee chair I want to ensure contributions,
> through the membership agreement, are acceptable
> to use without burdening the chair to any due
> diligence.  The due diligence is covered off by
> the agreement.  Legal experts have covered all
> this in the membership terms and I don't want to
> have to be in a position to interpret them
> personally ... that is clearly not my expertise.
> 
> BTW, where in
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php
> is "invited expert" defined?  I was unaware of
> Gabe's assertion that such a concept exists in
> OASIS parlance.  How do committees identify,
> qualify and accredit such experts without
> obligating them under the membership rules?
> 
> I hope these comments are considered constructive.
> 
> . . . . . . . . . . . . Ken  (Code List Representation TC Chair)
> 
> At 2007-04-05 22:30 +0100, Paul Fremantle wrote:
> >Gabe
> >
> >I completely agree. I think that any committer
> >on any project actively implementing an OASIS
> >specification under an OSI license should be
> >able to apply for a Open Source Membership free-of-charge.
> >
> >Personally I don't think this is going to cost
> >OASIS any loss of income, but it certainly will
> >encourage a wider view of OASIS standards.
> >
> >Paul
> >
> >Gabe Wachob wrote:
> >>Hi Chairs-
> >>             This is a topic that's come up for
> >> us I think at least twice. We have a community
> >> member (not an OASIS member) who is actively
> >> implementing our specification (XRI) and is
> >> interested in the spec discussion. However, we
> >> can't let them join our list and contribute
> >> because they have to be an OASIS member. So
> >> the only answer we can give them is "pay $300 to participate".
> >>
> >>             This seems absurd. Their
> >> implementation of our spec is one of the most
> >> valuable contributions to the TC's work at
> >> this point in the lifecycle of the spec. Their
> >> feedback on implementation issues and
> >> recommendations for how to adjust the spec are
> >> absolutely critical. And yet, they are left
> >> out of the conversation. The thought of
> >> forcing them to pay $300 to participate seems
> >> a bit ludicrous, since they are already
> >> contributing (in this case, as an individual on their own time).
> >>
> >>             OASIS has a concept of "invited
> >> expert". Could there be a new category of
> >> "invited open source implementer"? As I've
> >> said many times before, I think OASIS should
> >> be trying to facilitate Open Source
> >> implementations of the Open Standards it
> >> produces to the maximum extent it can (and to
> >> the extent its TC's wish that to allow Open
> >> Source - but that's a different discussion).
> >> You may think that $300 a year is a trivial
> >> amount of money, but for someone doing good
> >> work that benefits the OASIS community, it
> >> seems odd that we'd throw a barrier up for
> >> them to contribute even more directly.
> >>
> >>             I'm sure any potential abuse could
> >> be managed, just like I assume it's managed for the "invited expert"
> category.
> >>
> >>             Alternatively, I suppose the
> >> membership of the TC could "chip in" for
> >> membership of the open source implementer, but
> >> this seems like a "hack" that raises some
> >> questions about independence of participation
> >> and potential appearance of manipulation of the membership.
> >>
> >>             -Gabe
> >
> >--
> >Paul Fremantle
> >VP/Technical Sales, WSO2
> >OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair
> >
> >http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle
> >paul@wso2.com
> >(646) 290 8050
> >
> >"Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
> 
> 
> --
> World-wide corporate, govt. & user group XML, XSL and UBL training
> RSS feeds:     publicly-available developer resources and training
> G. Ken Holman                 mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com
> Crane Softwrights Ltd.          http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/
> Box 266, Kars, Ontario CANADA K0A-2E0    +1(613)489-0999 (F:-0995)
> Male Cancer Awareness Aug'05  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/bc
> Legal business disclaimers:  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal