[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [dita-adoption] Summary of new OASIS process
Hi Mary: <quote> Can I ask what the typical turnaround time is for one of
these articles? </quote> Varies: authorship of a first draft can take “forever”
to very quick, say a week or so depending on the writer. Requests for review
within the TC go out, and people review depending on availability. This can
again be either quick, by the next meeting (two week period), or longer if
certain key people are not available. The review in itself can be a slogging
process due to conflicting work schedules and availability. So I am concerned
that additional process complexity or steps will add to the turn-around time,
perhaps dramatically given our schedules. Troy From: Mary McRae
[mailto:mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org] Hi Troy, Can I ask what the typical turnaround time is for one of
these articles? I'm trying to better understand the timing concern. If someone
can outline your current timeline, from initial conception of idea through
approval and publication that would be extremely helpful for me. Thanks and best regards, Mary
On Nov 11, 2010, at 9:06 AM, Troy Klukewich wrote:
I think we’re going to have to carefully evaluate who are
audience is and where they hang out. The process following seems well designed
for official documents relating to and speaking to OASIS members, or for wider
public distribution of documents officially representing the OASIS standards
charter. In terms of informal adoption documents, helping people get up
to speed, as opposed to defining standards, I wonder if a public venue like dita.xml.org would be better, where anyone can join
and contribute without a protracted review phase. I am very concerned that a
protracted, complicated review phase with multiple votes and sign-offs is
likely to curtail enthusiasm for writing helpful articles on a regular basis
that are difficult enough to garner given our limited time and day jobs.
We might have a triage for those documents that are official,
which follow the TC process outlined following, and those that are not
official, which are posted outside the auspices of the TC. The downside I can see for unofficial documents is that they
lose the “branding” of the Adoption TC, which I think is
unfortunate, given that disseminating adoption information is the primary
purpose of the TC (as opposed to coming up with standards). I do not know how
to rectify branding, but perhaps this problem is better than curtailing article
production. Troy From: Kristen Eberlein
[mailto:keberlein@sdl.com] Key
links: OASIS
Technical Committee Process: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php TC
Administration Requests: http://docs.oasis-open.org/templates/TCAdminRequests.html Here
is a summary of how the new OASIS processes will
affect our feature articles · Our feature articles will need to follow
the guidelines outlined in “Section 2.1.8 Work Product
Quality”:http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php#specQuality . This means, among other items, that
we need to provide editable source, XHTML (or HTML), and PDF. · Our feature articles (now called committee
notes) must follow the processes outlined in “Section 3 Approval
Process.” o We register the work product: http://marypmcrae.com/wptemplate-request o We approve the work product as a
“Committee note draft.” This requires a full majority vote of the
TC. o We decide to submit a committee note draft
for public review; this also requires a full majority vote of the TC. If approved
by the TC, this draft becomes a “Committee Note Public Review
Draft”; it must be
accompanied by a “recommendation from the TC of external stakeholders who
should be notified of the review.” o We request a 30-day public review from Mary
McRae: http://marypmcrae.com/30-day-cndpr-request . This request form requires the
following information, among others: § URI for the committee note draft at http://docs.oasis-open.org/ § Link to the minutes for the Adoption TC
meeting at which the TC approved the committee note draft and voted to request
a review o Mary McRae announces the public review to the
OASIS membership list and “optionally on other public mail lists.” o Non-TC Members post comments to the TC's
public-comment list. [Do we have such as list?] We must acknowledge the receipt
of each comment and track the comments received; at the end of the review
period, we need to post a list of how each comment has been handled to our
e-mail list. o If we make ANY changes to the committee note
draft as a result of the public review, we need to start the whole process
over. The review period this time is only 15 days. o After a public review that does not generates
any comments that result in the changes to the committee note draft, we can
approve the work product as a committee note. This requires a special majority vote of the TC. If the 15-day review
generated any comments, this vote cannot be held before seven days have passed
since the close of the public review. To conduct the special majority vote, we
need to notify Mary McRae that the TC is ready to vote and provide her with the
location of the editable versions of the files. She sets up and conducts the
ballot. It’s
not clear to me whether we’ll need to request that OASIS create and
upload the committee note draft for us; there is a form for this at http://marypmcrae.com/cnd-creation-request . Best
regards, Kris Kristen James Eberlein l DITA Architect and Technical Specialist l SDL Structured Content Technologies
Division l (t) + 1 (919) 682-2290 l keberlein@sdl.com Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail --------------------------------------------------------------------- |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]