RE: [chairs] TC Process revisions released

[Diane Jordan <drj@us.ibm.com>]

I also have a question about this -
 the new policy seems to say that members should  lose voting
rights any time they miss 2 out of 3 meetings.  This seems overly
harsh.  Previously it took consistently missing 2 out of 3 meetings
to lose rights (assuming members responded to the warning appropriately).
  
 
Regards, Diane
IBM  Emerging Internet Software Standards
drj@us.ibm.com
(919)254-7221 or 8-444-7221, Mobile: 919-624-5123, Fax 845-491-5709

"Anderson, Steve" <Steve_Anderson@bmc.com>

05/09/2005 03:15 PM

To	James Bryce Clark <jamie.clark@oasis-open.org>, chairs@lists.oasis-open.org
cc	mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org
Subject	RE: [chairs] TC Process revisions released

I don't know if this was just added or if I simply
missed it before, but I
have a concern about the policy on maintaining voting status.  The
new
policy [1] says that upon missing 2 out of 3 successive meetings, the member
loses voting status -- period.  It says a warning MAY be sent (not
sure when
-- after the first absence?), but that loss of voting status does not depend
on such a warning.

Under the current good standing policy, missing 2 out of 3 consecutive
meetings results in a warning.  Loss of voting status only occurs
if the
member misses the next meeting.  That means that it takes missing
3 out of 4
meetings (and a warning) to lose status.

I can see why removing the warning from the process is valuable.  But
the
automatic loss of voting status after missing only 2 out of 3 meetings
(rather than 3 out of 4) is, IMO, unreasonable, particularly given the
lengthy and non-automatic process for regaining voting status.  Normal
"day
job" requirements are likely to cause absence in 2 out of 3 meetings
more
often that the LOA process is designed to accommodate.
--
Steve Anderson
BMC Software

[1] http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process_2005.04.15.php#2.4

-----Original Message-----
From: James Bryce Clark [mailto:jamie.clark@oasis-open.org] 
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2005 10:36 PM
To: chairs@lists.oasis-open.org
Cc: mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org
Subject: [chairs] TC Process revisions released

     The approved revised OASIS TC Process rules, effective 15
April 2005, 
are posted to the OASIS web site at [1], and on the effective date will
also be moved to  the main page for the TC Process at [2].  
We will apply 
the effective date as follows:  Any TC action that was initiated on
or 
before 14 April will be able to complete that action according to the 2003
TC Process rules.  Any action initiated on or after 15 April will
be 
governed by the 2005 revisions.  (So, for example, the three OASIS
Standard 
ballots pending this month, announced 1 April, will complete under the
old 
rules.)

     These rules, approved by our Board of Directors at their
last meeting, 
generally follow the structure of Member Review Draft released last October
(at [3]), although a number of additional revisions were made to take into
account the comments we received from members during that review.

     A summary of the principal changes is appended below, and
shortly will 
be posted to [4].  We will post a shorter form of this message to
the 
[members] list on Friday as well.

     Also, for those of you who wish to track the changes more
closely, I 
have attached an unofficial side-by-side parallel table of the 2005 and
2003 rulesets, in HTML and RTF formats.  If this seems broadly useful,
perhaps we also will post it on the website.  It may be more detail
than is 
generally needed.  For now it is an informal, extra tool.

     We will discuss the key TC Process changes in the TC Chair
F2F 
sessions scheduled during the upcoming OASIS Symposium, see schedule at
[5], and in a series of global conference calls (as we've done before)
shortly thereafter.  A significant revision of the OASIS "TC
Guidelines" 
also will be issued to reflect these updates.  Of course, you're also
welcome to contact Mary McRae or myself, your TC's designated Staff 
Contact, or any member of the OASIS staff with questions or comments.

Best regards   Jamie Clark

~   James Bryce Clark
~   Director, Standards Development, OASIS
~   jamie.clark@oasis-open.org

[1] http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process_2005.04.15.php
[2] http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php.
[3] 
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/members-only/download.php/9623/
TC%20Process20041007.pdf
[4] http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/change_summary_2005.php (to be
uploaded shortly)
[5] 
http://www.oasis-open.org/events/symposium_2005/related_events.php#roberts_r
ules

====

OASIS TC PROCESS CHANGE SUMMARY: 2005

This is a summary of the principal changes made to the September 2003 
version of the OASIS TC Process.  These changes were approved by the
OASIS 
Board of Directors on 23 March 2005, effective 15 April 2005.  NOTE
this is 
not an exhaustive list, and this document is non-normative.

TC attendance no longer affects TC Member status once achieved, nor 
subcommittee membership.  Participants may be either Voting Members
or 
non-voting Members of a TC.  Once a  person becomes a TC Member,
they 
remain in that state until they resign or cease to be eligible. Attendance
in a TC's activities only affects voting rights in the TC.  Also,
the 
attendance rules have been simplified slightly.

Several changes have been made to TC launch and scoping rules:
     *  A greater number of proposers is required to launch
a 
TC.  ("Minimum Membership" = at least 5 proposers, at least
2 of which must 
be from different organizational members.)
     *  Participants who are employee representatives of
an organizational 
OASIS member require confirmation from that organization when they join
a 
TC as a Member.  (Note that becoming a Member has consequences under
the 
OASIS IPR Policy.)
     *  In addition to the current right to "clarify"
a charter, a new 
procedure for "rechartering" has been introduced to permit broader
changes 
(such as expansion of the scope of a TC).

The advancement process for specifications has been modified:
     *  Specifications created by the TC but not yet approved
are given a 
defined name:  "Working Draft".
     *  A TC may by a majority vote of all Voting Members
(="Full Majority 
Vote") approve interim drafts as a "Committee Draft", to
indicate 
transitional stability,  and explicitly invoke the licensing obligations
of 
members under the OASIS IPR Policy.  Committee Drafts will not be
the focus 
of publicity (though they will of course be publicly available).
     *    When a TC gives its primary approval of a
specification, we will 
once again call that document a "Committee Specification", as
was the case 
previously.
     *    Public reviews will be required prior to,
not after, approval of 
a Committee Specification.
     *    Initial public reviews of specifications
will run for 60 days 
(increased from 30, in conformance with international practice), and any
subsequent reviews for 15 days (reduced from 30).

A number of quality-assurance practices have been added to the 
process.  These include mandated use of specification templates and
file 
naming practices, and more explicit rules around minimum public web page
content, information resources and the like.

Additional defined terms have been added for clarity.

Various terms and cross-references have been updated to coordinate with
the  recent OASIS IPR Policy revisions.
====