Re: [emix] Documents and SGIP

Seems to me we are stuck in a bad place. We can also release an EMIX spec for PR that references the wrong WS-Cal schemas and has known bugs and is thus something they should ignore because we don’t think it’s worth looking at yet.

From: Considine, Toby (Campus Services IT) [mailto:Toby.Considine@unc.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 3:02 PM
To: emix@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [emix] Documents and SGIP

The TC can, of course, vote however it wants.

We can do dozens of PRs if we want to.

I imagine quorum will be tough next week. Certainly edits will be slow next week, during the SGIP

The first meeting is after that is the 8^th.

As it stands now, with turn-over, it is *my* *guess* that PR announcements from OASIS will take more than a week to get out. That puts it on the 15^th or later.

I think participation will be way down if we do that instead of extending the message “Here is the draft we voted out for PR, look at it and comment—the announcement will come out soon”. I think that plays better than “Here is a document that you may ignore because we don’t think it’s worth looking at yet”

Others may read the tea leaves differently.

"It is the theory that decides what can be observed." - Albert Einstein

Toby Considine

Chair, OASIS oBIX Technical Committee
U.S. National Inst. of Standards and Tech. Smart Grid Architecture Committee

Facilities Technology Office
University of North Carolina
Chapel Hill, NC

Email: Toby.Considine@ unc.edu
Phone: (919)962-9073

http://www.oasis-open.org

blog: www.NewDaedalus.com

From: Holmberg, David [mailto:david.holmberg@nist.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 2:36 PM
To: Considine, Toby (Campus Services IT); Ed Cazalet; 'William Cox'; emix@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [emix] Documents and SGIP

Toby,

I still am not clear on why we need to go to PR to have something to discuss/present in Nashville. It seems we have good reasons to wait so that we can get a clean version of EMIX out. Why does going to PR help make a better “package” to present? And why then can’t we get a PR before Apr 15?

Thanks,

David

From: Considine, Toby (Campus Services IT) [mailto:Toby.Considine@unc.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 2:32 PM
To: Ed Cazalet; 'William Cox'; emix@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [emix] Documents and SGIP

It is if course up to the TC to decide what it wants to do, Mr Chair, but if we change anything, we will not start a PR before Tax Day.

From: Ed Cazalet [ed@cazalet.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 2:11 PM
To: 'William Cox'; emix@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [emix] Documents and SGIP

Concerning recommended changes to emix submitted before the meeting, will these be ignored until after the PR?

Edward G. Cazalet, Ph.D.

101 First Street, Suite 552

Los Altos, CA 94022

650-949-5274

cell: 408-621-2772

ed@cazalet.com

www.cazalet.com

From: William Cox [mailto:wtcox@CoxSoftwareArchitects.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 10:59 AM
To: emix@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [emix] Documents and SGIP

I would suggest that the WS-Calendar schemas be marked "informative" so there's no confusion that EMIX is defining them. This could be an annotation in the schemas or simply in the namespace document.

Not sure how to do with "no change" but you seem to be contemplating replacing those with the PR02 WS-Calendar schemas.

Thanks!

bill
--

William Cox
Email: wtcox@CoxSoftwareArchitects.com
Web: http://www.CoxSoftwareArchitects.com
+1 862 485 3696 mobile
+1 908 277 3460 fax

On 3/23/11 12:21 PM, Toby Considine wrote:

It has been suggested that we put together a package of EMIX work to share with the Nashville SGIP meeting. If you read the recent interpretation of the rules (Monday night) then you know that it cannot include any changes or directions received in tomorrow’s meeting.

You have all seen that EMIX (spec, schemas, and examples) was updated on Tuesday afternoon. If we want to share that work with the SGIP, then we should request a 2 week PR at the meeting.

Please be on the meeting (we need an absolute majority to vote a PR), and familiar with the latest documents and artifacts. In particular, I propose that a Public Review be based on

http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/41575/emix-1-0-spec-wd20.pdf

and

http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/41576/emix-1-0-schemas-wd20.zip

The note the other night stated that we must vote these documents, precisely, with no changes allowed of any kind.

We must, unfortunately, continue to carry the WS-Calendar schemas forward in this package as it is unclear if that TC will be able to pull off a second PR vote as they are not scheduled to meet this week.

If we are able to vote itout for PR, I will then propose that we distribute links and information to all PAP04, PAP04, and PAP09 (and the relevant DEWGS) before the weekend before the SGIP meeting.

Thanks

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it” -- Upton Sinclair.

Toby Considine
TC9, Inc

OASIS Technical Advisory Board
TC Chair: oBIX & WS-Calendar

TC Editor: EMIX, EnergyInterop

U.S. National Inst. of Standards and Tech. Smart Grid Architecture Committee

Email: Toby.Considine@gmail.com
Phone: (919)619-2104

http://www.tcnine.com/
blog: www.NewDaedalus.com

emix message