RE: [entity-resolution] minutes from ER TC phone call 20050215

["Paul Grosso" <pgrosso@arbortext.com>]

> From: Lauren Wood [mailto:lauren@textuality.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, 16 February, 2005 14:11
> To: entity-resolution@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [entity-resolution] minutes from ER TC phone 
> call 20050215
> 
> On 16 Feb 2005 Paul Grosso wrote:
> > I'd like us to double check things.  I do not believe we need
> > to certify that we're using a CD.  A CD is just put out for
> > public review and needs no certification.
> > 
> > I may be confused with the changing status of names in OASIS,
> > but this does not match what we're doing in the DITA TC, for
> > example.
> 
> It's my interpretation of the stuff in 
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php#standard
> 
> It starts with "A TC may recommend that the Committee Draft be made 
> an OASIS Standard." and then switches language to say that what is 
> submitted is "A formal specification" as well as "Certification by at 
> least three OASIS member organizations that they are successfully 
> using the specification" so from my reading, that means that the 
> certification has to be applied to the CD that we will be submitting, 
> i.e. the one that we just voted on but that is not yet on the site. 
> Nowhere does it say that you can certify you're using a previous 
> version of the CD, nor that some version other than the CD can be 
> made into an OASIS Standard. The CD here is not just any draft ready 
> for review, it's the formal Committee Draft as specified in 
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php#committee_draft
> (i.e., the one that used to be called Committee Specification).

So we're certifying the CD as part of the process of submitting 
it to become and OASIS Standard?  Is that it?

paul