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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

chairs message

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

Subject: RE: [chairs] Unique OASIS document identifiers

Another vote for "TCspec".


-----Original Message-----
From: Breininger, Kathryn R [mailto:kathryn.r.breininger@boeing.com]
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 8:01 AM
To: Eduardo Gutentag; Eve L. Maler
Cc: jkeane; Chairs (E-mail)
Subject: RE: [chairs] Unique OASIS document identifiers

TCspec seems much clearer to me...

-----Original Message-----
From: Eduardo Gutentag [mailto:eduardo.gutentag@sun.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2003 10:57 AM
To: Eve L. Maler
Cc: jkeane; Chairs (E-mail)
Subject: Re: [chairs] Unique OASIS document identifiers

Re: "cs" - although I do prefer "cs", how about TCspec?

Re: AFAIK those notices must appear "as is", unless the IPR
document is changed.

Re: TAB - due to other pressing businesses and just waiting to see
if there are other changes in the pipeline, I have not brought this
to the TAB's attention yet. If these are the last changes, I will
do so. Although, of course, I could do that while these changes
mature, giving the TAB time to digest the current version...Our
next meeting is the 21st of this month. I'll bring this up for
the TAB consideration then, I've just added it to the Agenda.

On Sun, 2003-03-09 at 07:07, Eve L. Maler wrote:
> Thanks for your comments (and kind words).  To be honest, I wasn't
> expecting to spend much more time on this -- I thought I had done the
> final version -- but can try to make a few more changes over the next
> couple of weeks.  More responses below:
> jkeane wrote:
> > 3.1. Second Bullet - "Lowercase spelling is /recommende//d"  /
> > 
> > Why? Some of our groups have grand discussions on camelCase and
> > UpperCamel case. e.g LegalXML and OdrXML are official title from their
> > charters. Mixed case reads better than legalxm or odrxml.   And, hey,
> > maybe I am just a case sensitive kind of guy ;-)
> > 
> > I don't see any need for this recommendation and, unless there is
> > a cogent technical reason, suggest deleting the thought in the
> > final version.
> It certainly seems unfair for me to use OdrXML as an example and then
> lowercase it, which was not the choice the real OdrXML group made!
> I don't have a problem saying that lowercase or mixed case may be used.
>   I could show examples of both.
> >       "3.1. General Rules
> >
> > The following rules apply to all documents:
> >
> >     *
> >
> >       Hyphens /must/ be used as separators of the major portions of a
> >       file name. Spaces /must not/ be used. Hyphens are /recommended/
> >       between words within the description and extended description
> >       portions, though underscores /may/ be used."
> >
> > Didn't we retire underbars in the the last discussion? With a poll?   We
> > should either discourage underbars or also be silent on this point.
> Well, they are discouraged (hyphens are "recommended"), and hyphens are
> mandated between guidelines-dictated parts.  I kept this allowance only
> because there's no way to parse a filename and find the official
> guidelines-dictated parts if hyphens are used within parts, and just in
> case, I thought it would be better to at least allow some other
> separator if someone cared.  I'm inclined to leave this as is, unless
> someone objects.
> > 
> > *3.4 "cs* for Committee Specifications"  Isn't this acronym a bit
> > cryptic? And contrary to the no cryptic acronym policy in the
> True.  What would be better -- cttespec? spec?  The latter doesn't seem
> so bad, and suggests that maybe draft / spec / std would have been
> better than draft / cs / oasis.  Thoughts?  (Sigh.)
> > *A.  Notices*
> >     Curiosity: What is the source of the language in this notice? From
> > the OASIS lawyer? Are we supposed to have that in all documents?
> > Speaking as a lawyer, can the language be simplified?
> I would love to have it simplified.  In constructing the original SAML
> specs, we discovered that all those statements were required to appear
> (see the Notices section of
> http://www.oasis-open.org/who/intellectualproperty.shtml), and ever
> since then, I've been treating them as boilerplate (and that's why
> they're in the template).  Karl, can you comment on the possibility of
> shortening these?
> > 
> >  AND - how can we bring this to closure? Do we vote? Consensus? Formal
> > Adoption by the Board? LegalXML has a steering committee next Tuesday
> > and I would like to report this is done.
> There is no formal process for the "chair community" to decide anything.
>   I had already made this "submission" to Eduardo Gutentag (TAB chair)
> and Karl and asked them to take it forward as appropriate, based on this
> community's self-organized manner of lurching forward on the subject.
> :-)  They would need to tell us what's happened since then.
>       Eve
Eduardo Gutentag               |         e-mail: eduardo.gutentag@Sun.COM
Web Technologies and Standards |         Phone:  +1 510 550 4616 x31442
Sun Microsystems Inc.          |         1800 Harrison St. Oakland, CA 94612
W3C AC Rep / OASIS TAB Chair

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>

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