Jim, and
others,
Let me chime in to
answer the question you posed for John. Several of us were at the face-to-face
meetings in Las
Vegas where these
committees were discussed and defined.
The "Requirements"
committee is doing, essentially, what you described. At face-to-face meetings
in Seattle and
Las
Vegas, their work was the
main topic for exposition and discussion. That work was also discussed during
intervening telephone conference calls. The technical committee, during this
time, was asked to proceed in more strict conformance with OASIS procedures
and rules, and that's why the charter is now before us - to bring the
"Requirements" work in line.
The "Blue Drafting"
committee was defined to work with the products of the requirements group, the
discussions from the face-to-face and telephone meetings of the technical
committee, and the discussions that will take place on the "Blue Drafting"
committee's own e-mail group (to be formed once chartered), and begin (with
our hired consultant) to produce (draft) the "Blue" specification. Additional
face-to-face meetings were scheduled for February (Salt Lake
City) and June
(Santa
Fe), in addition to
the meetings planned for April in conjunction with the OASIS Symposium in
New
Orleans. All this reflects
a determination to have intensified work focused on actually developing
"Blue."
I believe the
disconnect you seemed to note from reading the charters and such reflects how
such documents don't quite reflect the way people actually work. We're not all
going to forget what we said and did when talking "Requirements" when we
convene within the e-mail group for "Blue Drafting" and so forth. Note that
any and all of us can sign on for these committees, as well as for the
Technical Committee itself. Ultimately, the Technical Committee is the parent
committee and will be responsible for decisions and work products.
Perhaps John or
others have additional points that might clarify the situation. I know we all
meant to move forward, not to create barriers to progress.
Regards,
Roger
Roger
Winters
Programs and Projects
Manager
King
County
Department of Judicial
Administration
516
Third Avenue,
E-609 MS:
KCC-JA-0609
Seattle,
Washington
98104
V: (206) 296-7838 F: (206)
296-0906
roger.winters@metrokc.gov
COMING
SOON!
-----Original
Message-----
From: Jim Beard
[mailto:beard@counterclaim.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 10:59
AM
To: Electronic Court Filing Technical
Committeee
Subject: Re: [legalxml-courtfiling] "Must
vote" for TC voting members
John and Others,
I would
imagine you are correct that the holidays played a major roll in the lack of
voting. Having said that however, after reviewing the attached documents for
the subcommittees I was left a little confused.
My
understanding is that the Requirements Subcommittee is responsible for
developing use cases, a glossary, service descriptions of messaging
components, definitions of messaging profiles, and GJXDM compliant schemas.
While the Court Filing Blue Drafting subcommittee will simply review what the
other subcommittee produces. Is this a correct understanding of the situation?
If so why is there a need for the CFBlue subcommittee. Shouldn't the entire TC
be reviewing what the requirements subcommittee produces?
Thanks,
Jim
On Jan 4, 2005, at
11:01 AM, John Greacen wrote:
The subcommittee
charters failed to win approval in the voting that took place over the
Christmas holidays. Only 12 of our voting members voted, all in support
of the subcommittee charters.
Tom Clarke and I have
decided to disregard this result, attributing non response to the fact that
the balloting took place during the holidays. Therefore, voting members
will not lose their voting status because they failed to vote on the charters.
I have reposted
ballots on these charters. The proposed charters are attached.
Any voting member who
does not vote on these charters will lose his or her voting member status.
I remind you that the
TC decided during the Las Vegas face to face meeting to pursue an aggressive
timetable for completion of Court Filing Blue. That timetable includes
approval of these charters.
Thank you for your
participation.
John M. Greacen
Greacen Associates, LLC
HCR 78, Box 23
Regina, New Mexico 87046
505-289-2164
505-289-2163 (fax)
505-780-1450 (cell)
<Court Filing Blue
Drafting Subcomm charter 2d draft.doc><Requirements Subcomm charter 2d
draft.doc>To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the
roster of the OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/legalxml-courtfiling/members/leave_workgroup.php.
Jim Beard
counterclaim.com, Inc
http://www.counterclaim.com
http://openefm.sourceforge.net
(800) 264-8145