[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [security-services] proposed "committee last call" process
General comments: - I think sec-conform and glossary must be part of the deliverables. - I agree with the general process you outline. - All editors and the issue list editor will have to confirm their high availability in December and January to make this work. - I suspect that there are many outstanding (if somewhat small) issues that will arise with all the documents; we probably won't get through voting on all of them in January. - I think we *must* publish interim committee drafts in mid-January, even if we don't call them "last call" drafts. - I still think we should support this publication round with some publicity and outreach materials, regardless of the outcome on the "last call" issue. Eve At 04:23 PM 12/4/01 -0800, Jeff Hodges wrote: >during the focus group concall today, we discussed more fine-grained steps we >need to take along the path to issuing our "committee specification" for >OASIS-wide review. > >Some of us on the call felt that what we're striving for here by the end >of Dec >is to have a doc set that's ready for what we'd call "working group last call" >in the IETF/W3C context. > >The overall connotation of "last call" is "we're done, let's sit down and >review the docs in detail". > >We nominally came up with the detailed process noted below. I've taken the >liberty of filling-in some of the more detailed blanks. > >Below the process is a nominal proposed schedule we felt we should work >towards, in light of the process. There's a couple of ISSUES called out in the >proposed schedule. > >Please review and comment on all of this. > >thanks, > >JeffH & Joe > >ps: we've attached references to various process docs at the end of this msg. > > > ------------------------------- >Proposed "Committee Last Call" process: > >0. This is where we are now. At this stage, the doc(s)'s maturity level is >"committee working draft". > > >1. In order to issue a "committee last call" on a doc or docs, there should be >no open action items or issues associated with the doc(s). > > >2. A "committee last call" is issued by the committee co-chairs via an email >message to the security-services list. We will leverage content from IETF and >W3C examples. The "committee last call" message identifies the docs, lays out >the timeframe and vehicles for submitting comments, and provides some context >wrt the last call process. > >At this stage, the maturity level of the doc(s) is "candidate committee >specification". > > >3. People review the docs and submit comments (via the list -- comments >must be >in writing and available for all to see). > > >4. upon the "last call cutoff date" or shortly thereafter, the chairs and doc >editors summarize the comments received to the committee. If there are issues >with the doc(s) that the committee regards as "showstopper normative technical >issues", then the doc(s) don't pass "committee last call", and the process >iterates back to (1) (since there are again open issues with the docs). Else, >go to (5). > >detailed process for step (4): > >In order to decide whether there are any "showstopper normative technical >issues", the doc editors will summarize to the committee the issues raised >during last call (e.g. via a msg to the list). The co-chairs will facilitate a >walk-through of the issues list for each doc (if any) during a formal >committee >meeting. > >If a issue has a champion, and no one challenges the issue, then the doc >doesn't pass committee last call (i.e. goto (1)). > >If an issue has a champion, and the issue is challenged, a formal committee >vote is held. The question being voted on will be constructed so the result of >the vote will be to either "the issue is a showstopper normative techical one: >re-do Committee Last Call", or the issue is closed (e.g. it wasn't felt to >be a >normative technical one), or it is deferred (e.g. the issue may be a normative >technical one, but it isn't a showstopper at this point). If the issue is >closed or deffered, it doesn't hinder the doc(s) passing committee last call. > >If an issue no longer has anyone willing to champion it, it is closed or >deferred, and doesn't hinder the doc(s) passing committee last call. > > > >5. The doc(s) have passed "committee last call" and are subject to >non-normative editing. They remain at this step (5) and at "condidate >committee >specification" maturity level until all all non-normative editorial issues are >closed. Once these non-nomative editorial issues are closed, goto (6). > > >6. The doc(s) are annointed the maturity level of "committee >specification" and >are ready for submission to OASIS per OASIS "standards process" (see ref >below). > > ------------------------------- >Proposed schedule: > >5-Dec (Wed): Prateek to issue bindings-07 > >12-Dec (Wed): comments on bindings-07 due. > >~17-Dec (Mon): Prateek to issue bindings-08 based upon feedback on -07. > > >ISSUE: any interim dates similar to above for issuance/iteration on core-2x? > > >21-Dec: Have SAML doc set ready for Committee Last Call issuance. Doc set is >nominally.. > > draft-sstc-core-2x > draft-sstc-bindings-model-0x > >ISSUE: we need to decide whether these docs should be part of the above list.. > > draft-sstc-sec-consider-0x > draft-sstc-conform-spec-0x > >..any others? > > >21-Dec: Issue "Committee Last Call" msg to the list, with "last call cutoff" >date of 15-Jan (Tue). > > >15-Jan (Tue): "last call cutoff" date (gives ~2 weeks from 1-Jan for >review of >docs) > > >22-Jan (Tue): SSTC/Focus concall: walk-through issues culled from last >call and >do any necessary voting. Decide whether docs passed committee last call. > > > ------------------------------- > >Refs: > >OASIS TECHNICAL COMMITTEE POLICY >Section 2. Standards Process >http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.shtml > >IETF Working Group Guidelines and Procedures >http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2418.txt > >The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3 >http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2026.txt > >W3C Process Document > 5.2 The W3C Recommendation Track >http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process-20010719/tr.html#Recs > > ------------------------------- > >---------------------------------------------------------------- >To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription >manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> -- Eve Maler +1 781 442 3190 Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center eve.maler @ sun.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC