New ballot "Vote on cc-Review subteam report" (WAS RE: [regrep] Standards approval process)

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

Simply changing the subject because the previous subject ("Standards
approval process") is a different topic. I believe the CCTS document
discussion inadvertently began off of the "Standards approval process"
e-mail instead of the "Vote on cc-Review subteam report" e-mail.

Kind Regards,
Joseph Chiusano
Booz Allen Hamilton
Strategy and Technology Consultants to the World
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Webber (XML) [mailto:david@drrw.info] 
> Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2005 10:57 AM
> To: Farrukh Najmi; Breininger, Kathryn R
> Cc: regrep@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [regrep] Standards approval process
> 
> Farrukh,
> 
> I concur with that.   In our recent work we're finding at least
> one other way to approach this CCTS / RegRep- and I'm sure 
> other people will modify and adapt this significantly as they 
> get into really loading vocabularies into registry - and more 
> - and finding the speed bumps and comptability issues, etc.  
> Just for starters - going in an out of Excel spreadsheet to 
> XML and RegRep is one challenge - given the design teams are 
> currently using Excel as their front door.
> 
> I'd suggest this as a informative notes report - would work 
> well at this point.  I'm not sure any of know what the real 
> answers are - but its clear we will be working much on this 
> is 2005 - including all the CEFACT project work - and they 
> also may have yet another valid approach too (I see at least 
> two other team there working this stuff).
> 
> At the end of the day - this probably devolves down to a core 
> set of interoperable behaviours around a common set of 
> components in two or three different XML layouts and 
> technqiues - depending on what the problem domain is and the 
> audience and their preferred toolsets.
> 
> We certainly do not want to paint ourselves into a corner too 
> early here.
> 
> Thanks, DW
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Farrukh Najmi" <Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM>
> To: "Breininger, Kathryn R" <kathryn.r.breininger@boeing.com>
> Cc: <regrep@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Sent: Friday, January 14, 2005 3:42 PM
> Subject: Re: [regrep] Standards approval process
> 
> 
> > Breininger, Kathryn R wrote:
> >
> > >Below is the OASIS standards approval process.  I felt 
> everyone should
> > >be familiar with this process as we continue reviewing the 
> RIM and RS v.
> > >3.0 specs with the intent to move them forward through the OASIS
> > >Standards process.
> > >http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php#standards_approval
> > >
> > >
> > I am embarrased to say that I opened this document only now 
> before my
> > planned YES vote.
> >
> > I noticed that it uses the term "best practices paper" to 
> refer to the
> > paper. I think this would be
> > sending a confusing message. At the risk of being a PITA 
> may I suggest a
> > quick update that
> > replaces "best practices pare" with "report" and we then 
> vote to approve
> > that version?
> >
> > Sorry to have to bother Duane with a request for another update.
> >
> > If other team members think it is OK as is then I will go 
> along. Thoughts?
> >
> > -- 
> > 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/le
> ave_workgroup.php.
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 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/le
> ave_workgroup.php.
> 
>