OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

soa-rm message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [soa-rm] TC Process


Peter:

Many thanks. As I was preparing an email to follow up, I became aware of 
a rule under section 2.13 of the OASIS TC policies and procedures that I 
had overlooked before.  I apologize for this since I realize I have made 
a mistake procedurally.  My bad.

The text states that:

"A motion to open an electronic ballot must be made in a TC meeting 
unless the TC has adopted a standing rule to allow this motion to be 
made on the TC's general email list. When such a rule has been adopted, 
motions made on the mail list must also be seconded and discussed on 
that list."

I originally thought that merely making a motion to allow electronic 
voting also included the right to make and second motions via the list, 
however this text indicates that is not so.  Accordingly, we will need 
to place an agenda item on the next conference call allowing these 
motions to be made on the electronic list in the future.

I apologize again for this oversight.  I hope you will consider 
re-submitting your motion during the next call.

Duane

Peter F Brown wrote:

>Duane:
>
>Picking up on your hint/proposal at the end of your mail below, I would
>formally move that the TC votes on the "service customer" issue.
>
>My motion is:
>Given the debate in the TC regarding the correct scoping of the proposed
>Reference Model, I move that the TC agree that the concept of 'service
>customer' shall not be considered an a normative concept within scope of the
>RM. Further discussion of this concept shall be pursued only on this basis
>and may be used indicatively in any illustrative appendix to the RM or in
>subsequent work on reference arhcitectures but shall not be included as a
>normative part of the reference model.
>
>Rationale:
>I fear we are running ahead of ourselves and sometimes running in circles. I
>see the importance and relevance of concepts such as consumer, message, etc.
>to building actual SOA architectures, but - after following the exchanges on
>the list in the last weeks on this and related issues - I now feel that this
>concept is distracting or attention and risks taking further bandwidth.
>
>Comments:
>- I think that if the TC can focus its attention on this motion for a couple
>of days, we can nail down a key issue that will also help us all clarify the
>scope of the RM.
>- I would also suggest (this is not a motion!) that at the next TC confcall,
>an item for discussion could be whether it would be useful to establish an
>RA sub-cttee already/soon that could serve to channel some of these
>discussions without shutting them down.
>
>Peter
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Duane Nickull [mailto:dnickull@adobe.com] 
>Sent: 07 June 2005 20:06
>To: SOA-RM
>Subject: [soa-rm] TC Process
>
><snip/>
>
>Moving forward, I would like to suggest that if the subject of Service
>Consumer is at debate, we deal with it in the following diplomatic manner.
>I also hope it will shed some light as per Rebekah's comment on trying to
>understand the differences of opinion too.  That is very useful IMO.
>
>1. A motion from a voting member to vote on the topic
>
>2. Full discussion (can happen on the list and/or conf call).
>
>3. When either the discussion has ended or 2/3 of the TC votes that it has
>gone on long enough, we have a vote.
>
>4. After the vote, it is res judicata
>
>Currently, we do not have a motion asking for a vote.  If someone wants the
>SC to be in the RM rather than or alongside the RA, they need to make that
>motion. Discussion to follow.
>
>Duane
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]