RE: [ciq] RE: IMPORTANT - Your suggestions please

["Mary McRae" <mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org>]

Hi David,

  The issue is that there are two separate issues that are getting conflated ;-)

1. CIQ v3.0 as approved as a Committee Specification does *not* include xPRL.
There are two options - move xPRL forward as a separate specification, or
incorporate it into the existing CIQ spec (and therefore making it CIQ v3.1)

2. Problem with the xAL schema. This was reported by the emergency management TC
and is only encountered when using one particular development environment. In
order to correct this the TC needs to submit 3.0 for another 15-day public
review and then approve as CS (CS02)

Now, combining the two will require the version number of CIQ to bump from 3.0
to 3.1. However, I don't see this as something that would require the namespace
itself being updated. (Note: this is why many TCs use URIs rather than URNs for
namespaces and also why they do not include version numbers or dates).

So, if CIQ 3.0 is updated, it goes out for a 15-day review. If CIQ is expanded
to include xPRL, it goes out for a 60-day review and becomes CIQ 3.1.

I hope that makes sense?

Mary

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David RR Webber (XML) [mailto:david@drrw.info]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 11:41 AM
> To: mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org
> Cc: ciq@lists.oasis-open.org; kumar.sydney@gmail.com
> Subject: RE: [ciq] RE: IMPORTANT - Your suggestions please
> 
> Mary,
> 
> So where is the issue here?  Now I'm confused!!!
> 
> DW
> 
> p.s. We need to get those 3 member use verification statements done for
> V3.x and get it public.  I'm working on a "CAM kit" for V3.x - so that
> should make it easy for people to do that verification of use.  More on
> that next week...
> 
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject: RE: [ciq] RE: IMPORTANT - Your suggestions please
> > From: "Mary McRae" <mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org>
> > Date: Tue, March 11, 2008 11:35 am
> > To: "'David RR Webber \(XML\)'" <david@drrw.info>
> > Cc: <ciq@lists.oasis-open.org>,  <kumar.sydney@gmail.com>
> >
> > Hi David,
> >
> >  Unfortunately CIQ isn't an OASIS Standard; it's never reached that
> status.
> >
> > Mary
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: David RR Webber (XML) [mailto:david@drrw.info]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 11:18 AM
> > > To: mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org
> > > Cc: ciq@lists.oasis-open.org; kumar.sydney@gmail.com
> > > Subject: RE: [ciq] RE: IMPORTANT - Your suggestions please
> > >
> > > Mary,
> > >
> > > OK - so then we just include a note that this Committee Spec' has
> > > dependency on an errata to an existing OASIS standard - and that that
> > > errata will be handled separately as OASIS standard update - but
> details of
> > > that are available in {link to kavi zip file}
> > >
> > > Correct?
> > >
> > > DW
> > >
> > > > -------- Original Message --------
> > > > Subject: RE: [ciq] RE: IMPORTANT - Your suggestions please
> > > > From: "Mary McRae" <mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org>
> > > > Date: Tue, March 11, 2008 9:30 am
> > > > To: "'David RR Webber \(XML\)'" <david@drrw.info>,
> > > > <kumar.sydney@gmail.com>
> > > > Cc: <ciq@lists.oasis-open.org>
> > > >
> > > > Hi David,
> > > >
> > > >   There is no provision for errata against a Committee Specification;
> > > only
> > > > against an OASIS Standard.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Mary
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: David RR Webber (XML) [mailto:david@drrw.info]
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 9:17 AM
> > > > > To: kumar.sydney@gmail.com
> > > > > Cc: mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org; ciq@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > > > Subject: RE: [ciq] RE: IMPORTANT - Your suggestions please
> > > > >
> > > > > Ram,
> > > > >
> > > > > What is the issue with xAL errata?  I'm not seeing why this is a
> big
> > > deal -
> > > > > its just errata - and therefore relate to the existing xAL.  Just
> > > because
> > > > > its in the same review package - is not confusing or unclear.  The
> > > package
> > > > > is xPRL 3.1 + xAL errata needed to support that.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd grab that 15 day review!!!
> > > > >
> > > > > DW
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > -------- Original Message --------
> > > > > > Subject: [ciq] RE: IMPORTANT - Your suggestions please
> > > > > > From: kumar.sydney@gmail.com
> > > > > > Date: Tue, March 11, 2008 12:29 am
> > > > > > To: ciq@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > > > > Cc: mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Team,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If we do option 2, this could be a problem as the namespaces of
> the
> > > > > schemas have to be changed from urn:oasis:names:tc:ciq:xnl:3 to
> > > > > urn:oasis:names:tc:ciq:xxx:31. I do not want this to happen as it
> will
> > > > > impact the current implementers of V3.0. This is NOT the IDEAL
> solution
> > > and
> > > > > it looks ugly. I also need to change all original v3.0 documents
> that
> > > do
> > > > > not discuss xPRL to now discuss about xPRL.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The introduction of xPRL should not have any impact on current
> users
> > > > > except xAL schema errata.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Releasing xPRL v3.0 on its own looks good except that I do not
> know
> > > how
> > > > > to release the xAL v3.0 schema errata. Any release of xAL V3.0
> schema
> > > > > errata on its own is not possible. It has to go with V3.1 release
> of
> > > the
> > > > > original V3.0 specs. If we have had individual specs. for xNL, xAL,
> > > xNAL
> > > > > and xPIL (like in v2.0), we could have release V3.1 xAL specs. that
> > > covers
> > > > > the errata.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Therefore, I am confused. Not sure how to approach this problem!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ram
> > > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > > > TC Members,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > OASIS TC Admin have come back to my request for 60 days public
> review
> > > of
> > > > > xPRL V3.0. As per TC process, only the following can be done:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - Release V3.1 (of November 2007 release) with xAL errata fix for
> 15
> > > days
> > > > > public review
> > > > > >
> > > > > > or
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - Package xPRL V3.0 and xAL errata as part of a new version of
> CIQ
> > > > > (Version 3.1 and includes specs. released in Nov. 2007) for 60 days
> > > public
> > > > > review
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please let me know your suggestions. Looks like the later is
> better.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ram
> > > > >
> > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC
> that
> > > > > generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs
> in
> > > > > OASIS
> > > > > at:
> > > > > https://www.oasis-
> open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in
> OASIS
> at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php