Hi Michael,
Package acceptance is one of the rules. All specifications must conform to those rules, again, ensuring all OASIS specifications are uniform in appearance and contain the required content. I am sorry that the new DITA toolkit processing prepared by the TC did not include the proper notices statement, but this cannot be taken as a fault of OASIS staff. I think a four-and-a-half day turnaround (including a weekend) to move an entire office, including a network, and get the new T1 connections up and running was almost as good as we could have possibly hoped for. We are just at the seven day mark with regard to the submission for a 15 day public review and that includes a reprocessing on the part of the TC.
I sincerely appreciate the desire of the TC to move this as quickly as possible, and we will do everything within our power, and our rules, to help you meet your goals. Unfortunately, that does not mean disregarding those rules.
I am still hoping to get the public review announced today, although time is now running short. If the TC wishes to withdraw that request and feels that there were no substantive changes made and is instead ready to proceed with CS approval and OS submission ballot, please let me know asap.
All the best,
Mary
Mary P McRae Director, Standards Development Technical Committee Administrator Member Section Administrator OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society twitter: @fiberartisan #oasisopen phone: 1.603.232.9090
Standards are like parachutes: they work best when they're open.
On Oct 5, 2010, at 1:00 PM, Michael Priestley wrote:
Hi Mary,
>We have rules to ensure that each and every Technical
Committee follows the same process and there is no favoritism. "Bending"
the rules in effect breaks them and renders them useless.
I can appreciate this, but it sucks
when our spec is pushed out to another year (!) because of OASIS problems
with servers and package acceptance. I feel like our TC is being penalized
for OASIS process and technology problems.
Michael Priestley, Senior Technical
Staff Member (STSM)
Lead IBM DITA Architect
mpriestl@ca.ibm.com
http://dita.xml.org/blog/25
Hi Michael,
Answers inline.
Mary
On Oct 5, 2010, at 12:22 PM, Michael Priestley wrote:
Hi Mary,
We missed the deadline by only a few days, which is really unfortunate
since it pushes us over a full month.
There are still additional ballots to be held before the
submission can take place. Post review, two ballots (which can run concurrently):
approval as CS, and agreement to submit for OS ballot. Those are both 7
day ballots and again, like most TC Admin requests, have an SLA of 7 days.
We shoot for less, but that needs to be built into your timetable.
Is there any room for expediting any of the following:
- the current 15-day public review - is it really required?
That's up to the TC. The rule is that if substantive changes
are made, an additional 15-day review is required. If no further review
is required the TC can agree that no substantive changes were made and
request the CS/OS ballots to be initiated. Depending on when the next TC
meeting is that may still not be completed in time for a 15 Oct deadline.
Don't forget you also need your statements of use.
- the submission for voting - does it
need to wait till Nov 15th, or could it be submitted earlier, per the new
process?
to follow the new process you would need to instead have
the 60-day Candidate OASIS Standard review.
- the 15-day familiarization period
- is that absolutely required, or could it be waived, per the new process?
see above.
I urge everyone to read the new TC Process. It's an either/or
- current section 3.4 or new section 3.4. New section 3.4 includes statements
of use explicitly referring to the Committee Specification, a 60-day review,
and further confirmation before proceeding with OS ballot.
We have rules to ensure that each and every Technical
Committee follows the same process and there is no favoritism. "Bending"
the rules in effect breaks them and renders them useless.
Any of those options would get us back into a November timeframe for the
vote.
Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM)
Lead IBM DITA Architect
mpriestl@ca.ibm.com
http://dita.xml.org/blog/25
Hi Michael,
You would need to submit by 15 Oct for a November vote; that can't
happen since you'll still be out for public review. I agree and typically
advise against December votes, however WebCGM has done it and passed so
we know it's possible, and certainly DITA has a much larger following than
WebCGM.
Regards,
Mary
On Oct 5, 2010, at 11:32 AM, Michael Priestley wrote:
Hi Mary,
I think we're really looking for a standard in 2010. My one concern is
that a December vote would be hard to get numbers for.
Is there any way to move up the process to allow a vote in November?
Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM)
Lead IBM DITA Architect
mpriestl@ca.ibm.com
http://dita.xml.org/blog/25
Hi everyone,
Thanks, Kris, for drawing everyone's attention to the process changes
about to take place. I think the TC is well within the timeline to get
to ballot in Dec or Jan under the old rules unless another round of changes
is anticipated after the public review that is about to be announced.
The one point to consider if it's delayed beyond that is that another
60 day public review will be required at the new Candidate OASIS Standard
stage.
I am planning to come to each TC meeting for a quick review of the changes
and to answer any questions and will be sending a message later in the
week requesting a 15-min time slot.
Regards,
Mary
On Oct 5, 2010, at 10:30 AM, Kristen Eberlein wrote:
Hi, Don and the rest of the DITA TC.
I have an additional item that I think should move to the front of the
agenda for today’s meeting. It concerns changes in TC rules and when
we anticipate being able to get the DITA 1.2 spec out for an OASIS
vote. (I also think that we need to work on the items that must be submitted
to Mary at the same time as the request for an OASIS vote; see items highlighted
in red
below.)
Will we potentially be able to send the DITA 1.2 spec out for a vote in
2010, or will it need to happen in 2011?
Under the old rules, the following conditions apply, which would
mean that the earliest an OASIS vote could occur is December 16-31.
· The
DITA TC can approve a committee specification no sooner than seven days
after a public review ends. The vote is by ballot that OASIS administration
sets up. The TC can simultaneously request to submit the Committee Specification
to the Membership of OASIS for consideration as an OASIS Standard.
· Upon
resolution of the TC to submit the specification for consideration as an
OASIS standard, the TC submits the following items (copied verbatim) to
the TC Administrator:· (a)
Links to the approved Committee Specification in the TC’s document repository,
and any appropriate supplemental documentation for the specification, both
of which must be written using the OASIS templates. The specification may
not have been changed between its approval as a Committee Specification
and its submission to OASIS for consideration as an OASIS Standard, except
for the changes on the title page and running footer noting the approval
status and date.
· (b)
The editable version of all files that are part of the Committee Specification;
· (c)
Certification by the TC that all schema and XML instances included in the
specification, whether by inclusion or reference, including fragments of
such, are well formed, and that all expressions are valid;
· (d)
A clear English-language summary of the specification;
· (e)
A statement regarding the relationship of this specification to similar
work of other OASIS TCs or other standards developing organizations;
· (f)
The Statements of Use presented above;
· (g)
The beginning and ending dates of the public review(s), a pointer to the
announcement of the public review(s), and a pointer to an account of each
of the comments/issues raised during the public review period(s), along
with its resolution;
· (h)
An account of and results of the voting to approve the specification as
a Committee Specification, including the date of the ballot and a pointer
to the ballot;
· (i)
An account of or pointer to votes and comments received in any earlier
attempts to standardize substantially the same specification, together
with the originating TC’s response to each comment;
· (j)
A pointer to the publicly visible comments archive for the originating
TC;
· (k)
A pointer to any minority reports delivered by one or more Members who
did not vote in favor of approving the Committee Specification, which report
may include statements regarding why the member voted against the specification
or that the member believes that Substantive Changes were made which have
not gone through public review; or certification by the Chair that no minority
reports exist.
· The
above submission must be made by the 15th of any month to the TC Administrator,
who shall have until the end of the month to complete administrative processing
and checking for completeness and correctness of the submission. If the
submission is incomplete it shall be rejected but may be resubmitted at
a later time.
· The
TC Administrator shall submit the proposal to the OASIS Membership by the
first day of the following month. The first 15 days of that month shall
be used by the membership to familiarize themselves with the submission.
Voting shall start on the 16th of the month. The voting representatives
of those OASIS Organizational Members who were members at the beginning
of the familiarization period are eligible to vote, and must cast their
ballots by the end of the month.
The new rules introduce the following
changes (as well as others):
· There
is no longer a fixed timeline requiring submissions to be made by the 15th
of the month; submissions may be made at any time.
· No
familiarization period is required prior to a vote by OASIS membership.
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
<image001.jpg>
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
From: Don Day (LbW) [mailto:donday@learningbywrote.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 8:48 AM
To: mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org;
kim.goolsby@oasis-open.org
Cc: dita@lists.oasis-open.org;
Kristen Eberlein
Subject: Re: [dita] When will the 15-day review be announced
Hi. I'm bumping this request in hopes that I can provide the DITA TC with
an outlook at our meeting coming up later this morning. Given that the
requested changes were timely effected due to prioritized turnaround on
our end, I thought it would be considerate to get a sooner response.
--
Don Day
Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
On 9/30/2010 1:33 PM, Kristen Eberlein wrote:
Hi, Mary and Kim.
When will the 15-day review be announced?
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
<image001.jpg>
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
From: Kristen Eberlein [mailto:keberlein@sdl.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 8:05 AM
To: Kim Goolsby; Mary McRae
Cc: dita@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [dita] Changes required to submitted document - Darwin
Information Typing Architecture (DITA) Version 1.2
Many thanks, Kim!
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
<image001.jpg>
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
From: Kim Goolsby [mailto:kim.goolsby@oasis-open.org]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 7:26 AM
To: Mary McRae
Cc: Kristen Eberlein; dita@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [dita] Changes required to submitted document - Darwin
Information Typing Architecture (DITA) Version 1.2
Hi all,
I'll upload the spec this morning. I am so glad this is resolved!
Best,
Kim
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:55 PM, Mary McRae <mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org>
wrote:
(one more time, sorry)
And my apologies to Kim for trying to answer too many questions at once
and not paying close attention to the matter at hand.
Mary
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:10 PM, Mary McRae <mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org>
wrote:
Hi Kristen,
Yes, that's fine since you have the separate change log; while the blank
page isn't perfect, it doesn't harm or detract in any way.
Regards,
Mary
On Sep 29, 2010, at 1:44 PM, Kristen Eberlein wrote:
Hi, Kim.
1. Since the “Revision history” was indicated as
optional in the OASIS template, we decided to omit it from our committee
drafts. Therefore we do not want to reintroduce it at this point.
2. I can delete page 1237 from the PDF output. However,
all the pages will continue to be marked with “Page x of 1237.” I think
retaining the blank page is better.
Thoughts? I very much appreciate your help with this matter.
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
<image001.jpg>
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
From: Kim Goolsby [mailto:kim.goolsby@oasis-open.org]
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 12:42 PM
To: dita@lists.oasis-open.org
Cc: mary.mcrae
Subject: [dita] Changes required to submitted document - Darwin Information
Typing Architecture (DITA) Version 1.2
TCADMIN-243
Please make the following change:
1. Please add a 'Revision History' appendix to this document.
2. Looking at the pdf, there is an empty page 1237 at the end of the document.
I suggest removing this.
Thank you,
Kim
--
Kim Goolsby
Publications Specialist
OASIS Open: Advancing open standards for the information society
email: kim.goolsby@oasis-open.org
web: www.oasis-open.org
phone: 1.734.223.6890
--
Mary P McRae
OASIS
Director, Standards Development
TC Administrator
Member Section Administrator
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society
email: mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org
phone: 603.232.9090
--
Kim Goolsby
Publications Specialist
OASIS Open: Advancing open standards for the information society
email: kim.goolsby@oasis-open.org
web: www.oasis-open.org
phone: 1.734.223.6890
|