[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [chairs] When is a TCs work done?
David, So what is the exit strategy for your TC? IMHO, the only way to avoid these automatic shutdowns is for
every charter to be explicit enough so that TC members themselves can declare
victory and shut themselves down. Also the criteria isn’t that onerous: maintain
minimum membership (I’m sure temporary lapses are tolerable), and hold a quorate
meeting every six months! Cheers, Martin. From: David RR Webber (XML)
[mailto:david@drrw.info] I'm reminded of the maxim in any good initial business plan asking
- what is the exit strategy? Seems that OASIS has criteria based mainly around number of emails
posted, who's posting them (apart from the TC chair) and how many meetings and
minutes you have posted. As TC chairs however - I think we deserve more support than OASIS
hitting our TC with FUD messages to bolster continuation of the technical work. Several members I recently canvassed told me they would like to do
more than observer but their company is restricting hours and requiring formal
manager approval and justification for any new TC related work - even
just reading emails or joining a group. Given those types of
challenges its little wonder that typical TC work is being driven by just a
handful of individuals. OASIS needs to therefore do more in terms of assisting garnering
support for our work. So for example - one simple thing I notice that is
misleading - is that Kavi only shows voting members - what should be shown also
is the total number of observers (just the count), and non-voting members underneath
that also on the whole roster. Clearly TC chairs have a huge role in continuing work of a TC.
In the lifecycle of a standard it is way more than just calling meetings,
writing specifications and publishing schema. Rather than FUD messages from OASIS staff to our TC - we need more
informal coordination to help with members who may be contemplating
contributing - or just testing the pulse = looking to help get more involvement
and so on by working with the TC chairs and reaching out to potential new resources. Also - chairs usually know way more about what is really going on.
The mailing list only tells one small part of the picture - in terms of
what is external parties are doing, or planning to do with a specification, or
additional potential resources to advance new work. The current administrative door slamming by OASIS seems
to be based solely on reducing the number of TCs to some acceptable lower
number - rather than any rationale based on the importance of work - and need
to actively foster and help TC chairs gain support either within their TC or
with external industry groups or academic institutes who may benefit or
contribute further. Everyone is burned out of course on standards work - and its now
layers of burn out over burn out. Now in tough economic days it
seems that bean counting and ROI have totally taken over the equation of
specification development - rather than anything else relating to technical
value and incubating potential groundbreaking or interesting XML
capabilities within OASIS. Ironically the small independent members would appear to be those
that have the most flexibility to continue OASIS work and yet OASIS itself it
set to penalize them for trying! Thanks, DW |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]