[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [chairs] TC Process revisions released
Diane, Steve: I concur. If a member comes to 4 meetings in a row, misses one, attends one, then misses another one, they are no longer deemed a member by these rules, despite an overwhelming amount of participation. Since most of my TC is required to travel as part of their jobs, this scenario is highly possible. I would prefer a notion of excused absences. If someone contacts the chair before the meeting, explains why they cannot make it but still offers input for the meeting and then reviews the notes & minutes, I find they are more helpful than the type who may actually attend but not participate in the conversation in any way. I would like to ask if anyone would be opposed in principle to reviewing this? Duane Diane Jordan wrote: > > 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. > ==== > -- *********** Senior Standards Strategist - Adobe Systems, Inc. - http://www.adobe.com Chair - OASIS Service Oriented Architecture Reference Model Technical Committee - http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=soa-rm Vice Chair - UN/CEFACT Bureau Plenary - http://www.unece.org/cefact/ Adobe Enterprise Developer Resources - http://www.adobe.com/enterprise/developer/main.html ***********
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]