[ebxml-jc] Minutes from April 11 telecon

["Breininger, Kathryn R" <kathryn.r.breininger@boeing.com>]

Here are the minutes from today's call.  Thanks Colleen!

 <<JC meeting 04112002.doc>>  <<JC meeting 04112002.txt>> 


Kathryn Breininger
CENTRAL Project Manager
Emerging Technologies
Boeing Library Services

425-965-0182 phone
425-237-3491 fax
kathryn.r.breininger@boeing.com

Attachment: JC meeting 04112002.doc
Description: MS-Word document

OASIS ebXML JC Conference Call
April 11, 2002

Attendees:
Karl Best
Kathryn Breininger (current chair)
Colleen Evans
Ian Jones
Dale Moberg

Carry over items from last meeting

Joint ebXML Architecture meeting with ebTWG in Barcelona
Ian is trying to ensure the Messaging TC is represented.  TC representatives who currently plan to attend are:

Anne Fischer
Jacques Durand
Jeff Eck 
Brian Hayes 
Dale Moberg
Ian Jones (tentative)
Brian Gibb (tentative)

The goal of the meeting is to establish a joint architecture team between CEFACT and OASIS and begin working on issues.  There was a proposal that OASIS TC members attending the joint architecture group should pay the full weekly meeting fee.  Several JC members feel that is not appropriate, especially for a one-day joint meeting.

The joint architecture group charter is essentially the agreement signed last spring in Vienna.  This purpose of this first meeting is to get the group organized and identify issues.

Draft joint ebTWG architecture document was submitted as a starting point and Karl distributed it to the TC members who have indicated they will attend.  

Process
Karl is drafting a recommendation for the Board, which he hopes to submit within the next few weeks.  He is considering dropping the quarterly cycle in favor of a monthly cycle.  That would involve shortening the review period - perhaps combining the reviewing and voting periods.  He is trying to address how to shorten the period before a spec can be resubmitted in scenarios where it fails or has to be withdrawn.  Under the current process, it would take about 6 months before it could be resubmitted, which is much too long.  

Kathryn suggested that such a solution might resolve the current situation, with no provision to attach errata to specs, etc.

Karl asked if there should there be a public review period before a spec gets submitted to OASIS membership for review?  Would that avoid issue / situation requiring attachment of errata?

Dale questioned whether that review period wasn't already specified. 

Karl replied that it's currently a non-normative suggestion in TC guidelines, but not part of the process.

Karl distributed an email survey to the OASIS voting reps regarding streamlining the voting process and will consider the survey results in the recommendation.  

Ian suggested a process with a month to comment, 3-4 weeks for the TC to make amendments based on the comments, and a 4-week period for voting.  

Karl requested that if JC members have suggestions, they please email them to him.  He would appreciate any input.

New business
Discussed role of the Technical Advisory Board:  forward looking, purveying the overall architecture of all OASIS activities at a very high level.   Focus on the big picture - where are things going - what's the next big thing - what's missing in the big picture, rather than focusing on lower level details (e.g., the level of detail represented by a joint ebXML architecture).

Ian - Does the ebXML JC need some sort of link to TAB?  
Karl - don't want to change OASIS process to add another level of approval.    Maybe change up-front TC proposals to include more research into other efforts that may have crossover.   If OASIS professes to be bottom up and member driven, the consortium can't really put any oversight or approval process on TC creation - only perform quality control.

Next call
May 15 - 9:00 am PDT

Agenda for May 15 call
Planning - coordination call for Barcelona. 
Invite TC reps going to Barcelona to participate in the call.