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

[Renato Iannella <renato@nicta.com.au>]

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
NICTA