[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: OASIS on statements of use vs implementations
At the last meeting, one of the questions during the meeting was what exactly is required by an organization "endorsing" the use of a new spec? OASIS covers the practicality of standards in the TC Process document under section 3.4, Approval of an OASIS Standard: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php#s3.4 3.4 Approval of an OASIS Standard Simultaneously with the approval of a Committee Specification or at a later date, and after three Statements of Use have been presented to the TC, a TC may resolve by Special Majority Vote to submit the Committee Specification to the Membership of OASIS for consideration as an OASIS Standard. The phrase "Statement of Use" is defined thusly: "Statement of Use", with respect to a specification, is a written statement by an OASIS Organizational Member stating that it is successfully using or implementing that specification in accordance with the conformance clauses specified in Section 2.18*, and stating whether its use included the interoperation of multiple independent implementations. And that section regarding conformance states: 2.18 Specification Quality A specification that is approved by the TC at the Public Review Draft, Committee Specification or OASIS Standard level must include 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 main requirement for a specification then are statements of successful use or implementation of the spec. Any implementor must comply with conformance clauses, if any. "Endorsement" is not really what OASIS wants--they are looking for evidence of viability and quality. I believe that we should be careful about using the term "endorse" in place of the specific OASIS concept of "using or implementing" for SubCommittee contribuations to the Specification. The formula as given is simple and met by any combination. At most, we might recommend that at least one of the three minimum statements on behalf of an SC deliverable include an implementation. We should prefer much more to see that the specification itself is of value to more than one user. Regards, -- Don Day Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee Chair, IBM DITA Architects Board Email: dond@us.ibm.com 11501 Burnet Rd. MS9033E015, Austin TX 78758 Phone: +1 512-244-2868 (home office) "Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?" --T.S. Eliot
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]