[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [chairs] OASIS Organizational Voting is Somewhat Absurd?
I too see the problem. As other mentioned earlier, I think
the requirement of a broader OASIS membership voting exists primarily
to ensure high quality of OASIS standards. However in reality
most companies would have a policy of 'don't vote if you don't
care' which would immediately put the chair(s) of
the not-so-popular specs in a disadvantageous position and their only
resort may be to seek favors from unrelated OASIS membership to cast
their (meaningless) votes. Not a good situation.
So I guess there is a problem and we may all want to fix
it. However any solution we come up with should also meet the
original goal of ensuring high quality OASIS standards.
I like the idea of setting up domains but I would also
suggest to raise the bar higher in setting up a domain (by requiring certain
minimum membership, a review and approval of OASIS membership/TAB/Board, etc).
Basically so that the process does not get easily abused. Another point in the
process where the quality bar can be raised higher is by requiring TCs to
produce material related to compliance testing and by requiring certain
interoperability testing to occur (as opposed to merely a certification of use
by three member companies).
Thanks,
Sanjay Patil
Co-chair, Web Services Reliable Exchange (WS-RX)
TC.
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]