[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Fwd: [legalruleml-comment] Comments on LegalRuleML Core Specification Version 1.0
Dear LegalRuleML members, here after you can find the comments [1] provided by OASIS Technical Advisory Board (TAB)[2], in the person of Patrick Durusau[3].The TAB is composed by elected OASIS members that provide technical assessment to the TCs outcome, especially in the first public review, in order improve the quality of the future specs. I have analysed each comment in the light of the OASIS rules (what is strictly mandatory by the OASIS process) and what is desirable (what is recommended). I have also analysed some examples of other OASIS specs (e.g., TOSCA, ODATA) in order to see how the others have faced similar problems (precedents). Additionally I have taken some advices also from the OASIS Staff. The outcome of my work is in the second file (LegalRuleML-14March2017v2-mp.xls) that has an additional column with my annotation. Friday 24 March we will have the next LegalRuleML TC and we will discuss the possible solutions. I hope that this work helps to have a productive discussion. All the best, ps. the comments list is public available here:
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/legalruleml-comment/ [1]
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/legalruleml-comment/201703/msg00000.html -------- Messaggio Inoltrato --------
Greetings! The OASIS Technical Advisory Board (TAB) on initial public review drafts by OASIS TCs. On behalf of the TAB I have attached our comments on LegalRuleML Core Specification Version 1.0 as LegalRuleML-14March2017.xls. It isn't necessary to acknowledge each comment separately, just acknowledging the file will be sufficient. Hope you are having a great week! Patrick PS: I'm hopeful the TC can influence those involved in Deliberation RuleML, Reaction RuleML and Consumer RuleML to move their work to OASIS. While I respect the enormous amount of work put into those "specifications," they are by no means "specifications" in the sense that any standards driven vendor would recognize. While RuleML.org could replicate the processes and procedures that exist at OASIS, I suppose the question is whether they want to duplicate that overhead or devote their efforts to improving and promoting the families of "RuleML." That would not be an easy process, editorially or otherwise as the documents I saw, from a standards perspective, have a number of organizational and formal issues. But moving to OASIS would open up a world of vendors who recognize standards when they see them. Apologies for the brevity of my comments but as volunteers the TAB has to work with the time alloted for reviews, which often results in formal aspects getting more attention than substantive issues. -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) 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 |
Attachment:
LegalRuleML-14March2017.xls
Description: MS-Excel spreadsheet
Attachment:
LegalRuleML-14March2017v2-mp.xls
Description: MS-Excel spreadsheet
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]