[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [regrep] Update on Spec approval process
Farrukh,
Actually I think the Red Sox need a whole Pakistani supporters
contingent - a la cricket! I don't think baseball would ever
be quiet the same again!?!
But bottom of the 8th was where I was at - figuring we had
another inning here before it is all down to the final strikes!
DW
----- Original Message -----
From: "Farrukh Najmi" <Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM>
To: <regrep@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 9:52 AM
Subject: Re: [regrep] Update on Spec approval process
> David Webber (XML) wrote:
>
> >As the Americans would say - feels like the bottom of the eight.
> >
> >
> As a Bostonian, a Red Sox fan and a Pakistani who was always more
> partial to baseball than cricket (shocking really!) I believe
> you mean the bottom of the 9th :-)
>
> And yes, I feel we are at the bottom of the ninth with bases loaded. All
> we have to do now is hit that home run and then we can climb all over
> each other in a pile (shudder) :-)
>
> >Or as the English would say - we're into the final days'
> >play here and we're not bowling anymore than 75 overs and
> >that's your lot!
> >
> >DW
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Farrukh Najmi" <Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM>
> >To: <regrep@lists.oasis-open.org>
> >Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 9:43 PM
> >Subject: Re: [regrep] Update on Spec approval process
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>Matthew MacKenzie wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>Farrukh,
> >>>
> >>>I feel that you are rushing this too much. You need to give some of
> >>>us a breather to go back and make comments and make thoughtful
> >>>suggestions.
> >>>
> >>>I have not attended any of these review telecons because I felt that
> >>>the process was being pushed way too hard. You need to give
> >>>reasonable time for those of us who are not full time on this
> >>>standard. I understand that you are anxious to move to the next
> >>>release, however, I am much more interested in seeing a slow and
> >>>stable release cycle with extremely well reviewed products at each
> >>>release.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Fair comment Matt. Not every is able to spend the same amount of time on
> >>this.
> >>
> >>I cant help thinking though, that:
> >>
> >>-The specs have been out for a month since draft 01 was published. We
> >>received many good comments and have addressed them. At this point the
> >>comments are drying out.
> >>
> >>-We have momentum now and the TC is energetically engaged. All we needs
> >>is a joint push to deliver this baby.
> >>
> >>Of course whatever next steps we take will be decided as a team in
> >>tomorrow's con call.
> >>
> >>As always, thanks for your candid feedback.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>-Matt
> >>>
> >>>Farrukh Najmi wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Dear TC members,
> >>>>
> >>>>I have been educating myself on the OASIS Standards Approval Process
> >>>>[1].
> >>>>
> >>>>I learned a few relevant an interesting points undre the current
rules:
> >>>>
> >>>>1. A TC *CAN* give TC Approved status to a spec by voice vote in a TC
> >>>>telecon meeting. This can be done either by
> >>>>
> >>>>(a) roll call or
> >>>>(b) voice vote ("all those in favor..." etc.)
> >>>>
> >>>>followed by chair indicating his/her judgment that numbers were met
> >>>>(sufficient "yes"s, and no more "nos" than rule permits)
> >>>>at which time members can accept that judgment or challenge the
> >>>>conclusion (by asking for a roll call).
> >>>>
> >>>>2. The same voting process is allowed for the vote to send a TC
> >>>>APproved spec for public review.
> >>>>
> >>>>3. Neither vote requires a electronic ballot or a 2 week period.
> >>>>
> >>>>4. The current process allows the "TC Approval" vote and the "Send to
> >>>>Public Review" vote to occur in the same TC telecon meeting.
> >>>>
> >>>>I have already validated my interpretation of [1] with my colleague
> >>>>Eduardo Gutentag <eduardo.gutentag@sun.com> to make sure I did not
> >>>>misunderstand anything.
> >>>>
> >>>>Being a pathelogical optmist I would like to propose that we make
> >>>>every effort to have a very high turnout of TC members for tomorrow's
> >>>>meeting so that we can have everyone's vote count if we choose to
> >>>>have one or both votes tomorrow. Please do your best to attend and
> >>>>attend on time. Thanks.
> >>>>
> >>>>[1] Standards Approval Process
> >>>>http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php#standards_approval
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
>
>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Subject:
> >>>>Re: Question on spec approval process
> >>>>From:
> >>>>James Bryce Clark <jamie.clark@oasis-open.org>
> >>>>Date:
> >>>>Wed, 02 Feb 2005 15:26:41 -0800
> >>>>To:
> >>>>Farrukh Najmi <Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM>
> >>>>
> >>>>To:
> >>>>Farrukh Najmi <Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Responses below. Best regards JBC
> >>>>
> >>>>At 02:43 PM 2/2/2005, Farrukh Najmi wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>Hi Jamie,
> >>>>>As I a sure you are already aware, the ebXML Registry 3.0 specs are
> >>>>>nearing Committee Draft status.
> >>>>>I have the following question on the standards approval process [1]
> >>>>>-Can a TC give TC Approved status to a spec by voice vote in a TC
> >>>>>telecon meeting (assuming necessary votes were met and duly recorded
> >>>>>in TC meeting minutes) ?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Under current rules, yes. If unanimous, minutes should say so
> >>>>and note attendance. If not, minutes should clearly reflect that the
> >>>>necessary minimums were met. This can be done either by (a) roll call
> >>>>or (b) voice vote ("all those in favor..." etc.) followed by chair
> >>>>indicating his/her judgment that numbers were met (sufficient "yes"s,
> >>>>and no more "nos" than rule permits) -- at which time members can
> >>>>accept that judgment or challenge the conclusion (by asking for a
> >>>>roll call).
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>- Once a spec is TC approved, can a TC decide to submit it for
> >>>>>public review by voice vote in a TC telecon meeting (assuming
> >>>>>necessary votes were met and duly recorded in TC meeting minutes) ?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>- Can the TC Approval vote, and the vote to send TC approved spec to
> >>>>>public review, be conducted by 2 separate voice votes in the same TC
> >>>>>telecon meeting ?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>My apologies in advance if some of these questions are covered by
> >>>>>[1] already. If not you may consider clarifying in a future version.
> >>>>>Thanks very much for your help.
> >>>>>[1] Standards Approval Process
> >>>>>http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php#standards_approval
> >>>>>--
> >>>>>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.
> >
> >
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>--
> >>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.
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> 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.
>
>
>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]