[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [rights] TIME OUT, PLEASE
Karl,
Thank you for stepping in.
1. Your assessment is an accurate reflection of the current situation
(IMHO).
2. Your suggest is well placed and if I may add can serve both agendas
well. I would like to propose that one TC do the advanced technology and
study work we need so very much to advance the REL capabilities into areas
not yet addressed and would provide greater acceptability in the
future..They have requested this on several occasions. This TC can
establish its own charter and schedule etc...and the 2nd TC move forward
with the original charter and schedule it put in place.
If all the members can support this notion and add your own intellectual
capital to it we have a way forward.
Thank you,
Pete Schirling
Digital Media Standards
IBM Research Division
Office: +1 802 769 6123/Mobile: +1 802 238 2036/E-Fax: +1 802 769 7362
Mobile text messaging 8022382036@msg.myvzw.com
Internet e-mail: schirlin@us.ibm.com
"Karl F. Best"
<karl.best@oasis- To: rights@lists.oasis-open.org
open.org> cc: Karl <karl.best@oasis-open.org>
Subject: [rights] TIME OUT, PLEASE
09/20/2002 05:10
PM
Rights TC:
I think that it's time that I stepped in to put a stop to these
discussions. I've been quietly and patiently waiting, perhaps for too
long, to see if the TC could solve this situation on its own, while at
the same time talking to various people in the background to see if
there is a consensus of opinions regarding the situation. There
doesn't appear to be.
Over the past few weeks there has been a considerable amount of
discussion, both on the TC list as well as behind the scenes, about
the direction of the TC. A number of accusations have been made, as
well as a few defensive statements. OASIS management and Board members
are quite concerned about not only the TC and whether it will ever
complete any work, but more importantly how this controversy reflects
on OASIS and the quality of its work.
I have considered whether this situation is the fault of the chair.
Hari has certainly had a difficult task keeping things moving with all
the controversy. Perhaps he could be doing a better job -- or perhaps
the situation is beyond any but the most heavy-handed of chairs. I'm
happy to see that he has a vote of confidence from at least some of
the TC members. But replacing the chair would not solve what I think
is the underlying problem: there are two divergent camps within the TC
with very different goals.
While I have not been a participant in the RLTC and so do not have
first hand knowledge of the various accusations, I believe that all of
the problems can be boiled down to this: Some of the members of the TC
joined in order to work on XrML, and others joined to work on what
they hoped would be an RF rights language. The former have the
authority of the original charter behind them, as well as the chair
and a slight majority, while the latter have a very worthy goal and a
desire to move the TC in a different direction. (Perhaps this two-camp
view is overly simplistic, but I think that it helps explain a lot.)
I have no authority to force the TC to make any changes; that would
take action from the Board. (But note that this could happen if the TC
doesn't fix its own problems. There are Board members concerned about
the situation, and apparently one or more TC members are ready to
appeal to the Board.) But being the person with the responsibility to
administer the OASIS TC Process and ensure that OASIS technical work
is moving forwards, I would like to make a suggestion in hopes of
resolving the situation.
<suggestion>
Given that the original charter of the RLTC was to work on the XrML
contribution, and that anyone who has joined the TC did so knowing
that that was the charter, I suggest that anyone who doesn't want to
do work as currently defined by the TC charter should resign from the
RLTC and form a separate TC to work on a separate digital rights
language. I will assist, to the extent allowed by the TC Process, in
getting this new TC set up. All we need is a proposal from three or
more eligible people; any of the current TC members can do this.
For those of you who choose to stay in the RLTC to work on XrML, may I
suggest that you remember that for XrML to be approved as an OASIS
Standard you will need support of at least 10% of the OASIS membership
with no more than 10% voting against; you will need to create a spec
that is supported by the membership before the OASIS name can be
placed on it.
</suggestion>
Please take my suggestion in the spirit in which it was offered: as an
attempt to end the disputes that are hampering the RLTC from achieving
its work. This is for the good of OASIS as well as the TC. I am not
endorsing either camp or their goals as being better than the other,
nor am I agreeing or disagreeing with anyone's accusations or
opinions. I am recognizing only that the two camps have not been able
to reach a consensus and therefore suggest that they work separately
on their own goals.
</karl>
=================================================================
Karl F. Best
OASIS - Director, Technical Operations
+1 978.667.5115 x206
karl.best@oasis-open.org http://www.oasis-open.org
----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC