Re: [chairs] Voting No on TGF ballot

[Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Greetings,

Taking the AND MOST SIGNIFICANTLY point as representative of Peter's post:


> Fourthly, AND MOST SIGNIFICANTLY, if the conformance clauses were
> indeed not suitable for the TC process, they would have been
> refused by the TC Administration *before* the work product could
> have been approved as a Committee Specification or even as a Public
> Review Draft. It is difficult therefore to understand the motive
> for such a message to be sent out two days before the close of the
> final ballot - rather than at any of the earlier stages in the
> process.

The Chairs will note:

1) There is no statement in the TC Process to that effect, and,

2) There is no communication cited by Peter from the TC Admin to that
effect.

Moreover, you can review the minutes of the TGF TC for extensive
discussion of requirements. I am and will report back later today.

I think that fairly characterizes Peter's claims without getting into
the weeds.

Hope everyone has a great week!

Patrick

PS: And votes against the new form of standard that does not reflect
any credit on OASIS as a standards organization.





On 04/22/2013 09:24 PM, Peter F Brown wrote:
> TC Chairs,
> 
> I respect the right of any OASIS member to express his or her
> opinion on any matter before the OASIS membership, but I feel that
> the mail sent out by Patrick Durusau together with his referenced
> note are misleading and inaccurate.
> 
> Please note: Firstly, Patrick signs his attached note as "Member of
> the OASIS Technical Advisory Board" (TAB) although writing to me
> previously on this issue he stressed that the opinion is strictly
> personal. It has not been discussed or endorsed by the TAB nor by
> any of the other bodies that Patrick lists among his titles and
> responsibilities.
> 
> Secondly, he criticizes a particular deliverable rather than the
> process as a whole: the Technical Committee took extraordinary
> measures to ensure that the conformance section of the document was
> drafted in accordance with the OASIS TC Process document and
> sought, received, and followed, counsel from the OASIS TC
> Administration in this matter. The document was thus drafted in
> accordance with the process. If Patrick wishes to criticize the
> process, he should do that, rather than picking on a single
> deliverable drafted according to that process.
> 
> Thirdly, for someone so concerned with the TC Process, he raised no
> comment or objection through the various public review and
> commenting periods in the development of this work product. On the
> other hand, the TC did receive comments regarding the conformance
> clauses from other parties and which were addressed during the
> disposition of comments following the public reviews.
> 
> Fourthly, AND MOST SIGNIFICANTLY, if the conformance clauses were
> indeed not suitable for the TC process, they would have been
> refused by the TC Administration *before* the work product could
> have been approved as a Committee Specification or even as a Public
> Review Draft. It is difficult therefore to understand the motive
> for such a message to be sent out two days before the close of the
> final ballot - rather than at any of the earlier stages in the
> process.
> 
> Finally, TC process is very clear about what exactly is required
> within the conformance clauses: "... a separate section, listing a
> set of numbered conformance clauses, to which any implementation of
> the specification must adhere in order to claim conformance to the
> specification (or any optional portion thereof)." The TGF TC
> complied with this requirement to the letter, as evidenced by the
> acceptance of the work product by the TC Administration. Patrick
> hints at additional requirements that are not actually part of the
> process - again, possibly an indication of an imperfect
> understanding of OASIS rules and policy. What Patrick might think
> is useful as a test of conformance (and for which, in more
> technical, code-level, standards might be appropriate and which I
> would support) does not translate into what the process actually
> says.
> 
> In summary, Patrick demonstrates a flawed understanding of the core
> process and mixes his personal preferences with what the process
> actually requires. I do not wish to question his motives for this
> extraordinary post but I do respectfully suggest to all members
> that his advice be ignored.
> 
> I look forward, as does the entire TGF TC, to your support and
> endorsement of this work.
> 
> Best regards, Peter F Brown Co-Editor of the Transformational
> Government Framework Pattern Language - Core Patterns
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message----- From: Patrick Durusau
> [mailto:patrick@durusau.net] Sent: Monday, 22 April, 2013 17:18 To:
> chairs@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [chairs] Voting No on TGF
> ballot
> 
> Greetings!
> 
> I have posted a some what longer narrative about why organizational
> members should vote no on the TGF ballot that closes Wednesday,
> April 25, 2013 at: http://www.durusau.net/publications/TGF-No.pdf
> 
> Please pass this along to your primary reps.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Hope you are having a great week!
> 
> Patrick
> 
> 
> 

- -- 
Patrick Durusau
patrick@durusau.net
Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB)
Former Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34
Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps)
Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)

Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net
Homepage: http://www.durusau.net
Twitter: patrickDurusau
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRdqGcAAoJEBerZNWIP55s1WIH/RC8wWjS929cIMBUq07kOmjZ
KbnblbpFJoEqmCaHcZ/XDaT+wCOKxBQGnVtitso50eT8M4W0Tvf7BOslNUOaYaYu
GIuDup33QvsUH+o+KAwfrQOLjNCVNn7BWSI4OJ9f3URPQXBdKK7RpFR+SderdGVh
KCHiiU4Y0o+cD2Y2MOTwcpm12DyH0TRLKQKrr05L3hoYHZJUskASJ9BfY5Btg91R
qYGus8Zjsj1Q8ev9LEmpOaXbY/ix5md+ViHl+ZxFkhT78wSnQzA8L9FQRUt7uW5g
8KFpYqjtSiq01iCT6YILqtmMMDRRyO92JUYt77247dhGk/dVtwZ5vqMf3LH2hEg=
=h8A3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----