Hi Kris,
Thanks for the pointer to the SC governance documents (and apologies for overlooking them), and thank you for these guiding thoughts.
Iâll attempt to attend the next several TC meetings to regain voting status. I donât want to âplant a flagâ (the LwDITA SC would benefit from broader participation), but I do want to maintain the LwDITA SC's viability going forward, at least in the short/medium term. I would also encourage Frank or others to step up.
-Alan
And re-reading the policies document made me aware that we've got
some steps to follow here. I was jumping the gun to suggest
closing the subcommittee so rapidly; it's my (and the TC's)
responsibility to try to help arrange new leadership, if
necessary.
- Leadership: Do we have another person willing to serve
as co-chair or secretary of the subcommittee? If so, and that
person would be willing to be an active and voting member of the
TC, we'd meet the requirements. Frank Wegmann, might you be
willing to serve as secretary? I got the sense when Carlos first
brought up the fact that he would be leaving, that serving as
co-chair was not something that you thought you could manager.
Alan Houser? Would you be interested in stepping up?
- Can the subcommittee commit to meeting at least once a
month?
- What work item's will the subcommittee focus on? Based
on the report that Carlos gave to the TC on 26 October (see
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202111/msg00000.html),
we got the sense that pursuing a LwDITA spec was no longer
feasonable. The TC looked at whether updating the committee note
was possible, but thought that would be the right route/too much
work and a lack of volunteers. On the TC meeting on 02 November
(see
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202111/msg00008.html),
the TC floated the idea of getting a draft LwDITA spec into the
OASIS process as a committee specification draft (after DITA
2.0), but then not advancing the LwDITA spec any further.
Best,
Kris
<snip>
|