| I think the important question here is what problem(s) are we trying to solve. Who is likely to want to see the comment log? When (e.g. at what stage in comment collection and adjudication) are they likely to want to see it? What information are they likely interested in seeing?
A comment log in the midst of adjudication is still a maze of ideas, debates, and inconsistencies. While I am all for openness, I do not want extra effort that will result in questions for which the TC is still in the process of generating answers.
Ken
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Kenneth Laskey
MITRE Corporation, M/S H305 phone: 703-983-7934
7515 Colshire Drive fax: 703-983-1379
McLean VA 22102-7508
On Dec 21, 2012, at 10:57 AM, Robin Cover wrote: Re: [Paul, below and: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/chairs/201212/msg00028.html][non optimal to] add another mandate for the Chairs
[...] adequate to detail the suggestion as part of clearly delineated set of
suggested best practices Paul, I agree 100% that another mandate needs not be issued as a requirement for Chairs. Arguably (though variably), as things stand, the requirements for updates/currency of information on the TC Home Pages, as prescribed in TC Process, are falling on hard times, often more honored in the breach than in the observance. It makes no sense to prescribe yet more. And further: the need to maintain TC home pages by hand, via a horrible editing interface, makes it all the more a non-starter to ask Chairs/Secretaries to do yet more. My idea was that Staff could consider making link-updates for the public review releases: we now create the resources in OASIS Library, and if we also start to store public review comment disposition logs in the OASIS Library (in the release directory with the PR documents), it could be a natural time for Staff to annotate the TC home page as well, with a couple links. Already, at publication time, Staff makes an annotation (link) in the TC Kavi repository for a public review draft, so it's one click away from the editing interface for the TC home page. And yes: best practices trump new rules in many cases. The goal (IMO) would be mainly to make the comment disposition logs (or references to them) findable in a predictable location. As things stand, now: finding a log, even for Staff, can be a 20-minute process (e.g., if an email message Subject: does not indicate that the message contains the test/attachment for the log). - Robin Robin Cover OASIS, Director of Information Services Editor, Cover Pages and XML Daily Newslink Email: robin@oasis-open.orgStaff bio: http://www.oasis-open.org/who/staff.php#coverCover Pages: http://xml.coverpages.org/Newsletter: http://xml.coverpages.org/newsletterArchive.htmlTel: +1 972-296-1783 On Thu, 20 Dec 2012, Lipton, Paul C wrote: Hi Robin,
Thanks for filling me in on some of these thoughts. Regarding the idea of prescribing the addition of a link on the TC home page, I find that I am somewhat unsure that would be an optimal solution. My experience is that every time we add another mandate for the Chairs, we are opening up another possibility for even the best-intentioned Chairs to fail in their duty. The idea is worthwhile, but I wonder if it would be adequate to detail the suggestion as part of clearly delineated set of suggested best practices that would could not be confused with a much shorter, but equally clear list of requirements.
Just thinkin' out loud. :-) Happy holidays and New Year.
Best,
Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: Robin Cover [mailto:robin@oasis-open.org]
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 1:23 PM
To: Lipton, Paul C
Cc: chairs@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [chairs] Draft: proposed process for comment handing
What are people's thoughts regarding the idea of (optionally) posting
a public
link to the resolution document
+1
Paul, we (TC Admin team) have discussed mechanisms for doing this in a way that makes the comment resolution/disposition log easy to find -- by OASIS members and anyone wishing to track with OASIS standards.
One solution (but only one of several compatible mechanisms) I've suggested to Staff and TAB is that for public review logs, we may publish the logs in the OASIS Library within the "public review" release directory.
Of course, the URI reference for such resource in that location can be referenced in a hyperlink from other places as well. Since TC Process requires that the current/latest versions of approved Work Products be findable (" identification of the latest versions of the TC's Work Products") [1] it may be reasonable to propose that references on the TC Home Page, in the vicinity of URIs for public review drafts, include the URI reference to the corresponding disposition log for that review.
Just ideas for now.
- Robin
--
Robin Cover
OASIS, Director of Information Services
Editor, Cover Pages and XML Daily Newslink
Email: robin@oasis-open.org
Staff bio: http://www.oasis-open.org/people/staff/robin-cover
Cover Pages: http://xml.coverpages.org/
Newsletter: http://xml.coverpages.org/newsletterArchive.html
Tel: +1 972-296-1783
[1] "... The TC must keep the following information current on the TC web page
links to a repository of the draft and completed TC documents with
identification of the latest versions of the TC's Work Products"
On Thu, 20 Dec 2012, Lipton, Paul C wrote:
Hi all,
Regarding template documents for comments, IMHO examples are nice but should not be prescriptive. They should be clearly labeled as examples. We should continue to focus on being clear regarding what people should do, not how they do it.
I have a question. What are people's thoughts regarding the idea of (optionally) posting a public link to the resolution document in the comments mailing list? I don't think that this action is currently required and I am not suggesting that we need another rule, but I wonder if it would be a courtesy for interested parties without requiring much overhead on the part of the TC representative(s) involved.
Have a great holiday season and New Year, all!
Thanks,
Paul
From: Peter F Brown [mailto:peter@peterfbrown.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 12:35 PM
To: robert_weir@us.ibm.com; Chet Ensign
Cc: chairs@lists.oasis-open.org; tab@lists.oasis-open.org; TCA
Subject: RE: [chairs] Draft: proposed process for comment handing
+1
Best regards,
Peter
"To find fault is easy; to do better is more difficult" - Plutarch
Sent from my phone - apologies for brevity and typos: it's hard
writing on a moving planet ________________________________________
From: robert_weir@us.ibm.com
Sent: ?20/?12/?2012 06:16
To: Chet Ensign
Cc: chairs@lists.oasis-open.org; tab@lists.oasis-open.org; TCA
Subject: Re: [chairs] Draft: proposed process for comment handing It
would be good to clarify what a "comment" is.
Is every post to the comment list a "comment"? Even if the post does not relate to the draft under review? Even if it is a response to another post that does not itself raise an issue? Even the occasional post from a TC Admin (https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office-comment/201211/msg00001.html)?
What we've done with the ODF TC is transcribe into JIRA the essence of any post to the comment list that is actually a comment from a non-TC member on the specification. We do this for comments received anytime, for any revision of the specification. So if we're doing a public review for ODF 1.3 and we get a comment on ODF 1.2, we'll track that as well. But the Chair uses his discretion to determine what is and what isn't a comment. Presumably we elect Chairs, in part, for their judgement.
Regards,
-Rob
From: Chet Ensign <chet.ensign@oasis-open.org>
To: chairs@lists.oasis-open.org,
Cc: tab@lists.oasis-open.org, TCA <tca@oasis-open.org>
Date: 12/19/2012 07:25 PM
Subject: [chairs] Draft: proposed process for comment handing
________________________________________
Chairs,
I will circulate this to the broader membership after a review with you.
Last April, I opened a conversation about how to enable the OASIS requirements for handling comments to be met while minimizing the procedural impact on TCs. (The thread started here: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/chairs/201204/msg00020.html) The observations and insights offered were valuable. This email lays out the next step towards implementing a consistent process.
Below is my proposal for a procedure that I think meets the consensus from that conversation to (a) keep it simple, (b) provide options while (c ) meeting the TC Process requirements. I have attached a couple of sample templates based on the samples offered that could be used to record comments and their dispositions. Use of these won't be required, they will just be provided for the convenience of the TCs that want something to use as a starting point.
Please have a look at this over the next few weeks and share your thoughts with me. I will ask for broader feedback in January with a goal of documenting this, announcing it and then putting it into practice on or about February 1st. Note that the procedure will not be retroactive - it will apply to work started from its effective date forward.
To be clear, this changes nothing about the current requirements documented in the TC Process. This simply provides a consistent means for TCs and TC Admin to work together to meet the requirements - something that has been lacking to date.
1. TC Obligations With Respect to Comments
The requirements for handling comments are laid out in sections 2.2,
2.8, 3.2 and 3.4 of the OASIS TC Process. Those requirements are:
- That comments be received only through the TC's <short name>-comment@lists.oasis-open.org mailing list.
- That comments be received by one or more members of the TC including the chair.
- That comments be acknowledged.
- That comments be tracked and their resolutions documented:
a) During a proposed TC call for comment period;
b) During a public review of a TC work product;
c) During a public review of a Candidate OASIS Standard.
- And that at the end of the comment / review period, the TC post to its email list an account of each of the issues raised during the public review along with its resolution.
2. Proposed Procedure for Meeting These Obligations
Here are the proposed steps for a TC to take to meet the requirements.
a) The TC Chair, at a minimum, must subscribe to the TC's <tcname>-comment@lists.oasis-open.org mailing list. It will likely make sense for another TC member (e.g. secretary, editor) to be assigned to subscribe to the list and track and report comments and issues back to the TC.
b) Someone from the TC must acknowledge that the TC has received the comment by sending an email acknowledgement to the provider. A simple "thank you for your comment; the TC will be consider it" message is sufficient.
c) The TC must track each comment received and how the group decides to resolve it. Per the TC Process, a TC is not required to take any action on the substance of the comment, but the decision not to must be recorded.
The TC can choose to track comments and resolutions however they wish: in a word processing document, in a spread sheet, in JIRA, in the TC wiki. The TC must at a minimum record:
+ The date the comment was received;
+ A link to the email in which a comment was received; The name of the
+ person or entity providing the comment; A brief summary of the
+ comment; A statement of the TC?s decision on how to handle the
+ comment, in as much detail as the TC wishes to provide.
In the event that a single email provides multiple comments or issues, each must be listed, tracked and resolved separately.
The list need not be cumulative however keeping a cumulative list is likely to be more convenient when the time comes that you want to submit a Committee Specification as a Candidate OASIS Standard. The TC Process states that, before an OASIS membership ballot can be held on a COS, the TC must provide "a pointer to an account of each of the comments/issues raised during the public review period(s), along with its resolution." Having all the comments and their resolutions stored in one list will make satisfying this requirement easy.
d) Four weeks after the end of a public review will be deemed "the end
of the review period." By this point at the latest, the TC must post to its email list a document containing, at a minimum, the pieces of information listed above. The document can be either a word processing document or a spread sheet but it must be a document that can be opened and read by any interested party.
If the TC is using JIRA or some other means to track comments, a document must be created by exporting the information from that source.
If the document is a cumulative list of comments and resolutions, it should also contain, for each comment, identification of the draft to which it applied.
The posting email can be created by loading the document into the TC's document repository and using the automatically generated email to produce the pointer or by attaching the document directly to the email.
With that email, the TC obligations will be considered fully met.
3. What TC Administration Will Do With the Comment Resolution Document
A key objective here is to ensure that comments and their resolutions can readily be found by other who are interested in the TCs work. Here is what TC Admin will do with the documents.
a) When the TC is ready to take another action on its work product (e.g. request another public review, request a ballot to approve a Committee Specification), a pointer back to this document will have to be provided as part of the support request. TC Administration will not proceed with a requested action until the comment resolution document is provided.
b) A link to the comment resolution document will be included in the
announcements of subsequent public reviews, document approvals, Special Majority ballots and other communications where it will provide additional, useful information.
c) The comment resolution documents will also be stored in the OASIS Library along with the public review drafts to which they apply. This will help to ensure transparency and traceability between comments received during a public review and their resolution.
Thanks very much for your feedback and help putting a process in place. My best wishes to you all for happy holidays.
Best regards,
/chet
----------------
Chet Ensign
Director of Standards Development and TC Administration
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society
http://www.oasis-open.org
Primary: +1 973-996-2298
Mobile: +1 201-341-1393
[attachment "draft-comment-resolution-list.xls" deleted by Robert
Weir/Cambridge/IBM] [attachment "draft-comment-resolution-list.odt"
deleted by Robert Weir/Cambridge/IBM] [attachment
"draft-comment-resolution-list.ods" deleted by Robert
Weir/Cambridge/IBM] [attachment "draft-comment-resolution-list.doc" deleted by Robert Weir/Cambridge/IBM]
|