RE: [dita-s1000d-discuss] Notes on what some other TCs have done + 2 suggested next steps

["Chet Ensign" <chet.ensign@comcast.net>]

Hi all -

At Scott Hudson's prompting - and because I am surveying OASIS TCs anyway -
I took at look at some of the other OASIS TCs who are doing work that
compliments or coordinates with or extends other non-OASIS standards. Here
are a few notes on things I found ...

#1 Biometric Identity Assurance Services (BIAS) Integration TC

This is organized as an OASIS TC. Its charter says: "The Biometric Identity
Assurance Services (BIAS) project of Committee M1 of INCITS (the
InterNational Committee for Information Technology Standards,
www.incits.org) is intended to provide the biometrics and security
industries with a documented, open framework for deploying and invoking
[biometric] identity assurance capabilities that can be readily accessed as
services. The OASIS BIAS Integration TC is intended to define and describe
methods and bindings by which that INCITS BIAS framework of services, and
elements of it, can be used within XML-based transactional Web services and
service-oriented architectures. ... It is expected that the two initiatives
will inform and improve each other  "

Its scope includes the following:

"... specify a set of patterns and bindings for the implementation of the
proposed taxonomy of BIAS functional operations..."
"... review, and if appropriate recommend enhancements to, the definitions
and taxonomies of [those] BIAS operations, to leverage known information
exchange and assurance patterns... arising in service-oriented systems"


#2 CGM Open WebCGM TC

This is organized as an OASIS TC. The purpose is "to accelerate the further
adoption, application, and implementation of the Computer Graphics Metafile
(CGM), the international standard for open interchange of structured
graphical objects and their associated attributes. The WebCGM Profile of CGM
was developed by CGM Open and is a current recommendation of the W3C."

The TC has active liaisons with SC24, W3C SVG, ATA GWG, ASD (AECMA) EPWG,
USSIG (US S1000D), and TechDoc (part of IDEAlliance) and, in its scope, says
"In addition, the CGM Open WebCGM TC will maintain relationships with other
international standards groups involved in CGM and web graphics technology."
It also says, under its deliverables:

"In the CGM community there is general agreement about the prioritization of
three badly needed, partially finished work items ... The following is a
list of the three highest-priority, most critical items...

- WebCGM DOM specification ...
- Interoperability reporting/tracking system ...
- Refresh of product ICS database ..."

Then there are several TC's, such as the Asynchronous Service Access
Protocol (ASAP) TC, whose goal is "... to create a very simple extension of
Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP) that enables..."


** How do these relate to the S1000D / DITA proposed TC or SC?

Each seems to have a specific purpose that is a concrete subset of the goals
of the larger set of standards. For example, "define methods and bindings" -
"develop DOM specification". They also exist for the purpose of either
promoting the adoption and commercial use of the standards, or in the case
of the Web Services TC's, to extend an existing standard in order to promote
the expansion and commerical applicaiton of Web Services for various
business purposes.

Given this, it appears to me that the proposed S1000D / DITA activity has
precedence within OASIS. It would make perfect sense to take a simliar
approach, establishing an OASIS TC to identify mappings, best practices,
and/or extensions to the DITA specification (and possibly offer proposed
extensions to the S1000D specification to that body) in order to promote (a)
interoperability between systems and content collections based on either
standard and (b) increased adoption and use of both specifications by the
publishing / content creation marketplace. (Or words to that effect...)



** What does this mean for the discussion list?

OASIS discussion mailing lists have a short shelf-life - max 90 days - with
the primary goals being (a) to determine whether real interest exists in
forming a TC and (b) if yes, to draft a charter - or at least start the
charter - so that moving on to organizing and launching the TC can be
accomplished quickly. (From the TC Guidelines: "Before proposing a new TC
proposers should have determined the TC's purpose, scope, schedule,
deliverables, and leadership, as well as be certain that there is sufficient
interest in participation. If you aren't sure about some or all of these
issues, you may wish to consider starting a discussion group first to
determine these things A discussion group is an email list hosted by OASIS
for up to 90 days for the purpose if fostering open dialogue on a specific
topic area. The deliverable of a discussion group is a proposal to start a
new OASIS TC.")

Since we operate under a time limit, I think next steps would be to poll
people and determine whether sufficient interest exists. If it does, then we
should discuss how to go about drafting a charter, perhaps using some of the
previous TCs as models. (I'm sure they'll take the copying as a compliment
<grin>)

Best,

/chet