[uddi-spec] Comments on Process Document

[John Colgrave <colgrave@hursley.ibm.com>]

Below are the comments that I sent privately to Luc and Tom.

John Colgrave
IBM

I agree with most of Claus's comments and have not bothered to duplicate the
typos etc.

I will focus on section 1 as I find it very confusing. To begin with, here
is a list of the various document types, with my acronyms for them, that are
either mentioned or implied:
1 Requirements Specification (RS)
2 Subcommittee Working Draft (SWD)
3 TC Working Draft (TCWD)
4 Subcommittee Candidate Draft (SCaD)
5 TC Candidate Draft (TCCaD)
6 Subcommittee Committee Draft (SCoD) - an oxymoron I know
7 TC Committee Draft (TCCoD)
8 Committee Specification (TCS)
9 OASIS Specification (OS)

Is it assumed that at least one subcommittee will always be required, or can
the TC produce specifications directly? Let us assume that for a given
specification, 2 subcommittees are required to produce the working drafts,
S1 and S2. Their documents will be named accordingly. I will try and spell
out what I think section 1 is saying and you can correct as necessary.

a) The TC gathers, refines etc. the requirements and produces the approved
RS.

b) The TC creates S1 and charters it to provide S1WD.

c) The TC creates S2 and charters it to provide S2WD.

d) S1 produces S1WD and votes on it. Section 1.3 says that the subcommittee
votes to advance this to TCWD status but that can't be right as the TCWD is
produced from both S1WD and S2WD. I think we should say that the
subcommittee votes to submit S1WD to the TC for approval and inclusion into
the TCWD.

e) S2 produces S2WD and votes to submit it to the TC.

f) Can the TC reject/return S1WD and/or S2WD? Assuming it does not do so in
this case, the TC combines S1WD and S2WD to form the TCWD. Does it do this
directly or form a different subcommittee to do it?

g) Section 1.4 says that Candidate Drafts are prepared by the TC or a
subcommittee. Do we need to say why one option might be chosen over the
other? What is the preparation involved? Section 1.3 just talks about the TC
voting to advance the TCWD to TCCaD status. In this case, assume the TC
decides to create two subcommittees S3 and S4 to produce the Candidate
Draft.

h) The TC creates S3 and charters it to provide S3CaD.

i) The TC creates S4 and charters it to provide S4CaD.

j) S3 produces S3CaD and votes to submit it to the TC for consideration.

k) S4 produces S4Cad and vodes to submit it to the TC for consideration.

l) The TC votes on S3CaD and S4Cad and approves them. They are merged into
the TCCaD either by the TC directly or by yet another subcommittee.

m) The TC forms two different subcommittees, S5 and S6 to evolve the
Candidate draft.

n) S5 produces S5Cod.

o) S6 produces S6Cod.

p) The TC accepts these and, either itself or in a subcommittee, merges
these to produce the TCCoD.

q) The TC votes to release the TCCoD for public review.

r) The TC votes to move the TCCoD to TCS status.

s) OASIS votes to move the TCS to OS status.

I may have missed a few steps but I am sure you get the idea! The number of
stages and the bouncing around between the TC and subcommittees is
incredibly confusing.

I think we need to say more about what happens if/when any of these votes
fails.