MOX Charter comments - Related Work

[William Cox <wtcox@CoxSoftwareArchitects.com>]

Responses to these issues should be reflected in (1)(b) ...definition of 
the problem to be solved, and in the non-normative section (2)(a).

There are several statements that there is no related work. But Jacques 
Durand has cited some within OASIS; the proposal lists "analyzing a 
subset of the tools currently in use..."; some of the semantic web work 
addresses similar semantic combinations. I believe that there are also 
references on the Ontolog lists.

I have not had time to study the references that I don't already know 
:-).  Reference [7] does not have author(s) listed.

Some of the concepts described here fit with the SOA-EERP TC's approach 
to Business Quality of Service and Business SLAs. It may be that the 
relationship is that BQoS would carry such information, but a 
coordination should be included in the proposed charter.

Moreover, since "The Web of Mashup and Metadata Scripting Language" is 
cited in (1)(c) - "The TC accepts as its starting point...", then (2)(a) 
seems disingenuous at best, and may be simply in error, in saying in 
response to the question "Identification of similar or applicable 
work..." that no other OASIS TC is doing this, and that no other 
"working group" is doing anything that overlaps. If the goal is to 
standardize, starting with WMMSL, then it should be stated instead of 
obscured. The question is straighforward; it deserves a straighforward 
answer. Saying that no other OASIS TC is doing this should be a given!

This is also severe conflict with (2)(g), which (albeit optional) relies 
on the reader to understand the relationship of WMMSL which seems to be 
the only answer so far to the question. Given other questions raised 
about related and contributed work, all of this needs to be revisited. 
Your charter will be more clear and more compelling with this section 
filled in, perhaps as "contributions anticipated include but are not 
limited to..." so there's a single concrete statement.

The proposed charter says that there are "tools currently in use", and 
the first work item a survey of [maybe a subset of] such tools. The 
statement is (1)(d) is inconsistent with (1)(c) which says "...analyzing 
a subset of the tools currently in use." But there are no specific 
references to such tools; this should be remedied.

And if such tools exist, is there not technology in them?

(1)(b) starts off talking about what is "typically done"; is not that 
related work?


bill cox
-- 
William Cox
wtcox@CoxSoftwareArchitects.com
+1 862 485 3696 mobile
+1 908 277 3460 fax