OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

emergency message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: RE: [emergency] Re CAP-IPAWS Profile Specification Issues

Hi Renato,

 I'll let Jamie speak for himself, but as the OASIS TC Administrator it is
my responsibility to ensure that the TC Process Policy is adhered to. That
Policy requires all work of a TC to be publicly visible, and that is the
case here. The initial requirements document was contributed to the TC as
required, a subcommittee was created to work on the profile specification
and all their work is publicly viewable/minuted/archived, as are the current
TC deliberations. I will not accept submission of a document for public
review unless it meets all criteria contained in the TC Process and related
rules (templates, naming guidelines, etc.) and has been properly voted on
and approved by a full majority of voting members.

All the best,


Mary P McRae
Director, Technical Committee Administration
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society
email: mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org  
web: www.oasis-open.org
phone: 1.603.232.9090

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Renato Iannella [mailto:renato@nicta.com.au]
> Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 1:49 AM
> To: James Bryce Clark
> Cc: emergency@lists.oasis-open.org; Art Botterell; oasis-board-
> comment@lists.oasis-open.org; Scott McGrath; Mary McRae
> Subject: Re: [emergency] Re CAP-IPAWS Profile Specification Issues
> On 18 Feb 2009, at 12:42, James Bryce Clark wrote:
> > But it also was suggested that TC members who are DHS staff or DHS
> > contractors are acting improperly, if they favor including the DHS
> > material.  That's silly.  Standards committee members are all
> > experts, with biases, which they bring into a TC ... to hammer out
> > compromises .. which is what we do in standards work.  As long as
> > the deliberations are carried out properly and transparently under
> > our rules, no-one should be attacked for having an opinion.
> >
> > It also was suggested that OASIS or its staff has some intent to
> > control the TC.  That's silly, too.  The TC is free to make its own
> > choices.  Art expressed concern about the contract OASIS made with
> > DHS to provide some assistance and information to DHS about the
> > spec.  OASIS could not have agreed to a contract that asked us to
> > influence or assure the technical decisions made by the TC.  And we
> > didn't.  Because we don't have that power.
> >
> > The contract was not posted to the TC because, for whatever reason,
> > the contractor set some rules around how it's disclosed.  Which Art
> > and everyone is welcome to pursue.
> James, in the first para you say "as long as the deliberations are
> carried out transparently"....then you say (3rd para) that a Contract
> between OASIS and DHS related to "providing assistance" to a DHS about
> an EMTC spec cannot be made available to the TC for "whatever reason".
> Could you explain the apparent contradiction?
> Cheers...  Renato Iannella

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]