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] No more Committee Specifications?


> I agree - it should be clearer.  Also - people have to vote 
> TWICE on the document - once to approve it - and then
> again to move it to OASIS for review / vote.

There's a purpose for that. Not all TCs intend to submit their CD to 
OASIS for consideration as an OASIS Standard. Some TCs may want to quit 
at CD stage, so it's not an automatic thing.

> This is too much for most - it would help if Kavi automatically
> threw them into the next vote once they click on the one - 
> but it doesn't - so they vote once and think they are done....

Kavi is a separate issue from the process. We don't have a way to 
autocreate a ballot based on the results of a prior ballot.

> Chaos.

I don't see how this would be chaos, but it is a step to remember.

> In a similar vein - I'm finding that getting Member Company
> endorsement of their use of spec's can be like pulling teeth - 
> after its first gone thru Company Marketing and then Legal - 
> for sign-off - what comes back can be unrecognizable - then
> it has to go back again because they left off key words from
> the OASIS side.   
> More Chaos.  

Can you suggest some other way to make certain that the spec is being 

> Also - the bigger scheme of things is changing - whereas it
> used to be the model that big companies did stuff and that
> made the spec's real - now you have open source - and 
> therefore there is only likely to be one implementation - but 
> many people using it for different clients.   Not to mention
> that many committees now only have one or two sleep
> members from big companies and all the work is being
> done by individual members.
> I'd like to see validation of spec's be allowed to include
> an open source implementation as one of the three - and
> that endorsements from fielded substantial clients (say
> more than 500 employees or similar) - be allowed too
> as equivalent to an OASIS member company saying
> they like it.

All pass on these suggestions to the Board as part of their on-going 
review of the TC Process.


> This is eating up a lot of committee time right now when
> this should be simpler and easier to do - and people 
> who want to endorse specifications and are 
> happily using them - should be able to say that
> and it count.
> Thanks, DW.
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Norman Walsh" <ndw@nwalsh.com>
> To: <chairs@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 2:36 PM
> Subject: [chairs] No more Committee Specifications?

Karl F. Best
Vice President, OASIS
office  +1 978.667.5115 x206     mobile +1 978.761.1648
karl.best@oasis-open.org      http://www.oasis-open.org

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