Jim, and others,
Let me chime in to answer the question you posed for John. Several of us were at the face-to-face meetings in Las Vegas where these committees were discussed and defined.
The "Requirements" committee is doing, essentially, what you described. At face-to-face meetings in Seattle and Las Vegas, their work was the main topic for exposition and discussion. That work was also discussed during intervening telephone conference calls. The technical committee, during this time, was asked to proceed in more strict conformance with OASIS procedures and rules, and that's why the charter is now before us - to bring the "Requirements" work in line.
The "Blue Drafting" committee was defined to work with the products of the requirements group, the discussions from the face-to-face and telephone meetings of the technical committee, and the discussions that will take place on the "Blue Drafting" committee's own e-mail group (to be formed once chartered), and begin (with our hired consultant) to produce (draft) the "Blue" specification. Additional face-to-face meetings were scheduled for February (Salt Lake City) and June (Santa Fe), in addition to the meetings planned for April in conjunction with the OASIS Symposium in New Orleans. All this reflects a determination to have intensified work focused on actually developing "Blue."
I believe the disconnect you seemed to note from reading the charters and such reflects how such documents don't quite reflect the way people actually work. We're not all going to forget what we said and did when talking "Requirements" when we convene within the e-mail group for "Blue Drafting" and so forth. Note that any and all of us can sign on for these committees, as well as for the Technical Committee itself. Ultimately, the Technical Committee is the parent committee and will be responsible for decisions and work products.
Perhaps John or others have additional points that might clarify the situation. I know we all meant to move forward, not to create barriers to progress.
Regards,
Roger
Roger Winters
Programs and Projects Manager
King County
Department of
Judicial Administration
516 Third Avenue, E-609 MS: KCC-JA-0609
Seattle, Washington 98104
V: (206) 296-7838 F: (206) 296-0906
COMING SOON!
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Beard
[mailto:beard@counterclaim.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005
10:59 AM
To: Electronic Court
Filing Technical Committeee
Subject: Re:
[legalxml-courtfiling] "Must vote" for TC voting members
John and Others,
I would imagine you are correct that the holidays played a major roll in the lack of voting. Having said that however, after reviewing the attached documents for the subcommittees I was left a little confused.
My understanding is that the Requirements Subcommittee is responsible for developing use cases, a glossary, service descriptions of messaging components, definitions of messaging profiles, and GJXDM compliant schemas. While the Court Filing Blue Drafting subcommittee will simply review what the other subcommittee produces. Is this a correct understanding of the situation? If so why is there a need for the CFBlue subcommittee. Shouldn't the entire TC be reviewing what the requirements subcommittee produces?
Thanks,
Jim
On Jan 4, 2005, at 11:01 AM, John Greacen wrote:
The subcommittee charters failed to win approval in the voting that took place over the Christmas holidays. Only 12 of our voting members voted, all in support of the subcommittee charters.
Tom Clarke and I have decided to disregard this result, attributing non response to the fact that the balloting took place during the holidays. Therefore, voting members will not lose their voting status because they failed to vote on the charters.
I have reposted ballots on these charters. The proposed charters are attached.
Any voting member who does not vote on these charters will lose his or her voting member status.
I remind you that the TC decided during the Las Vegas face to face meeting to pursue an aggressive timetable for completion of Court Filing Blue. That timetable includes approval of these charters.
Thank you for your participation.
John M. Greacen
Greacen Associates, LLC
HCR 78, Box 23
Regina, New Mexico 87046
505-289-2164
505-289-2163 (fax)
505-780-1450 (cell)
<Court Filing Blue Drafting Subcomm charter 2d draft.doc><Requirements Subcomm charter 2d draft.doc>To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/legalxml-courtfiling/members/leave_workgroup.php.
Jim Beard
counterclaim.com, Inc
http://www.counterclaim.com
http://openefm.sourceforge.net
(800) 264-8145