Re: [regrep] [Fwd: [regrep-semantic] IBM BI-ICS]

["Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>]

Farrukh Najmi wrote:
> 
> Chiusano Joseph wrote:
> 
> >Farrukh Najmi wrote:
> >
> >
> >>David RR Webber wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>Joe,
> >>>
> >>>OK - despite Scott saying that BC-ICS is not IBMs answer to CAM,
> >>>the fact remains that if you have CAM, which we do, CAM is available
> >>>in open source - and an OASIS spec' - then there is absolutely no
> >>>earthly reason why you would want to do ICS instead.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>+1
> >>
> >>We should not even consider a spec until it is in an open standards body.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Farrukh, could you please elaborate on your meaning of "consider"?
> >
> >
> By "consider" I mean discuss as TC business. Sending an FYI is fine to
> keep people
> informed on events. However, an open standards activity should not in my
> opinion
> waste time discussing proprietary specs.
> 
> >Separately: I do think that it's wise for technical committees (OASIS
> >and beyond) to be aware of what is out there, and - out of that set -
> >what is likely to be advanced into an open standards consortium in the
> >future, and how likely.
> >
> >
> I agree that "to be aware of what is out there" is important for any
> technologist.
> That is why I see nothing wrong with sharing information as an FYI with
> the TC like
> we often do.
> 
> My concern level rises when we as a TC start spending collective cycles
> on a
> proprietary spec.

I completely agree - a perfect example is WS-Addressing, which is
referred to in multiple emerging open specifications (too numerous to
mention).

Joe
 
> Thats said, we are all free to express whatever opinions we hold and
> participate in whatever
> threads we want. If a discussion gets too off-topic then the TC chair
> can intercede.
> 
> --
> Regards,
> Farrukh
> 
> 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/regrep/members/leave_workgroup.php.