[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [tosca-interop] Re: Interop Guide - What is the Appropriate Track For Now?
Just trying to be complete in terms of options, Richard. :-) I agree that “taking the normative things out” would limit the usefulness quite a bit. As you suggest, the later
option which you detail below is the more practical. Thanks, Paul
From: Probst, Richard [mailto:richard.probst@sap.com]
Not clear what you mean by “take the normative things out”. The details are needed for interoperability. If we want to dance around the fact that they are needed
by saying “you might want to handle parameters this way, if you choose” we could pretend that it is non-normative. But if we actually leave the details out, the document is worthless. I support the plan to keep the guide as a WD until v.next as long as that means (1) it’s covered by OASIS IPR and (2) there is a public URL pointing to the
document to allow anonymous access. Best, --Richard From:
tosca-interop@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:tosca-interop@lists.oasis-open.org]
On Behalf Of Lipton, Paul C Doug, I’m merging in Thomas’s question and my response below, as the thread accidently got split.
We are on the same page in just about every way. I’m fine with normative things going into the spec and agree that is the ONLY place for normative content. It’s simple. If
normative things belong in the spec and only the spec; either v1, v1.errata (limited to a narrow set of corrections), or v.next (v2), then don’t produce a Committee Note that contains normative things.
The current Interop Guide appears to have normative things and is not the TOSCA spec. As Doug says, that’s bad. So, our choices are simple: 1.
Take the normative things (all of them) out of the Interop Guide (might reduce usefulness, but I have no objection) 2.
Keep the Interop Guide at the WD level until v.next starts. Do not position the current WD or advance it as a Non-Standards Track work product (CND) in any fashion. When
v.next begins, put the normative stuff in the spec and advance the v.next spec, as we normally do. Note:
a.
There are no functional problems with this. Implementers inside or outside the TC can access the current document by using the public URL provided by Kavi until v.next
begins.
b.
Because normative stuff with standing belongs in the spec (as Doug said) and a CN, which is essentially intended for marketing material and high-level whitepapers, is
the wrong track, we take care to keep our normative stuff where it belongs, in the spec (as per Doug).
c.
A non-normative Interop/Best Practices guide becomes a separate consideration, at that point. Thanks, Paul
From:
tosca-interop@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:tosca-interop@lists.oasis-open.org]
On Behalf Of Doug Davis Paul, -----Original Message----- Hi Thomas, What we do with the Interop Guide should not affect our timeline for v1 Spec at all. That should continue to go forward towards OASIS Standard at all due speed. Each work product (doc) has its own path, votes, etc.
Hope I'm understanding the question correctly. Thanks, Paul -----Original Message----- From: Thomas Spatzier [mailto:thomas.spatzier@de.ibm.com] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2013 1:25 PM To: Lipton, Paul C Cc: dug@us.ibm.com; Matt Rutkowski (mrutkows@us.ibm.com);
Probst, Richard (richard.probst@sap.com); Simon D Moser;
tosca-interop@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [tosca-interop] Interop Guide - What is the Appropriate Track For Now? Hi Paul, so does that mean that we can still keep the timeline for the "core" TOSCA spec (i.e. don't have to re-do public review and so on) and just start a draft of another sibling "spec". If that is possible, then I guess it sounds like a good
solution. Because I tend to agree that the document is more than just hints and tipps on implementation ... Regards, Thomas --------------------------------------------------------------------- IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH Tivoli Service Automation Manager Development, D2705 Schoenaicher Str. 220, D-71032 Boeblingen, Germany Phone: +49-7031-16-1219 Email: thomas.spatzier@de.ibm.com IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH / Vorsitzende des Aufsichtsrats: Martina Koederitz Geschäftsführung: Dirk Wittkopp Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen / Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 243294
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]