[ebxml-jc] two issues

["Karl F. Best" <karl.best@oasis-open.org>]

JC:

A couple of issues I need to raise:

1. As you are probably aware, the Vienna ebXML MoU between OASIS and
UN/CEFACT specified that each side would have three voting reps and two
non-voting technical rep to a joint management group. OASIS' three reps
are Patrick Gannon (OASIS CEO), Simon Nicholson, and Norbert Mikula, all
from the OASIS Board of Directors. I am one of the non-voting technical
reps, and we are in need of a second. The OASIS Board would like the JC
to nominate a person to fill that role; the Board would then make the
final decision.

Responsibilities of the rep are to attend meetings of the joint
management team to represent OASIS technical activities. Meetings are
bi-weekly phone calls, and possible occasional f2f meetings that would
likely be scheduled to coincide with other meetings (I don't think we'd
ever schedule a stand-alone meeting; we want to keep this light-weight.)

2. You're probably aware that the Vienna agreement also stated that
there would be a joint architecture team to design the next phase of the
ebXML specs. ebTWG has gone ahead and formed an architecture team on
their side, and are waiting for OASIS to do the same. The two teams
would then comprise the joint team, or perhaps send reps to be members
of the joint team.

The OASIS Board would like to hear recommendations from the JC on how to
form the architecture team and how it should operate. For example, does
the JC itself want to be the OASIS architecture team? Or should it be a
separate TC or JC? Should it be restricted to ebXML only, or would it
define an architecture for all OASIS e-business technical work?


Dale: would you please put these two items on the agenda for the next JC
meeting? (BTW, when is it?)

</karl>
=================================================================
Karl F. Best
OASIS - Director, Technical Operations
978.667.5115 x206
karl.best@oasis-open.org  http://www.oasis-open.org