Re: RQ draft in progress

[Jon Bosak <bosak@boethius.eng.sun.com>]

[lauren@sqwest.bc.ca:]

| >    This appears to imply that the incremental cost of creating a
| >    TC should, on average, not exceed the incremental revenue
| >    gained through the addition of members as a direct or indirect
| >    result of creating the TC.
| 
| Let's assume that the cost of creating a TC (PR, time for review, 
| adding to the web site, etc) is equivalent to the cost of having two 
| new members. This would seem to indicate that if the Footware TC 
| starts on the Boot specification and two new members join, that is 
| acceptable. But if the Footware TC then wants to create the Shoe 
| specification, and no new members join, that would be 
| unacceptable. 

I think that you are taking this more literally that I intended; note
the "on average."  We aren't trying to make every TC balance the
budget, we're just concerned that the cost of running an arbitrarily
large number of TCs should be more linear than combinatorial, which we
fear could happen if we're not thinking about this when we design the
superstructure.

Having said that, it's quite possible that when we actually discuss
this at our next meeting (1/20) we will lose the second paragraph
under RQ 2 and just settle for the general statement in the first one:

>    The creation of OASIS technical committees should not be
>    limited by the resources of OASIS as a corporation.

It seems that every attempt to be more specific than this just leads
us down side paths looking for budget equations, which aren't
necessary here.  All I meant by this item is that different
organizational models will imply different incremental costs to the
corporation of starting up each TC and that we have to be aware of
this when we're considering different designs.

Jon