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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

oasis-member-discuss message

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

Subject: RE: [oasis-member-discuss] FW: Possible change to TC voting rules - input requested

Thanks for the further details.  Clearly you are more in favour of short cryptic one-liners! ; -)
I've learned from long experience that in committee work - you have to be able to back things up with more in-depth analysis to gain credibility and also so that peer review of exactly what is intended is worked out.  Often - English being the inprecise tool that it is - two people can appear to be saying the same thing - but in fact they are quite different in significant details.
I'm not sure there are any short cuts here - it is what it is.  You cannot substitute procedural devices for real world experience with actual XML and systems across a BROAD community of interest.  Most especially - when no dialogue occurs and specifications are too rapidly moved thru the process - this almost always results in sub-standard technology outcomes - where the substance is too shallow - and lacks breadth.
So I say - there is enough checks and balances - if companies are deliberately stacking the process - and stiffling the technical innovation within their own team - this fools noone - (except the paid marketing PR machine!) - and actually hurts them technically - if their aim is to foster broad adoption.  A quick read through the specification by those technically astute will quickly discern what is really going on - and the lack of support for the broad use model...
There's an old saying - give people enough rope to hang themselves with!

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [oasis-member-discuss] FW: Possible change to TC voting
rules - input requested
From: "Newcomer, Eric" <Eric.Newcomer@iona.com>
Date: Sun, October 29, 2006 9:40 am
To: "David RR Webber (XML)" <david@drrw.info>
Cc: <oasis-member-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org>

Hi David,


I think I was saying what you thought I was saying, which is that it would be an improvement to try to get companies to come up with company positions on committee issues.  That could be done without preventing the pro and con arguments from being presented, but it would help by cutting down on the public resolution of what are by definition internal debates.  In the end companies can’t really advocate for conflicting positions on TC issues.  I mean I guess they could but that would most of the time show that they don’t have a clear position and that would be another reason it would help to cut down on that kind of thing.


I sometimes see companies investing effort in committees to ensure they have as many representatives attend a TC as another company, or to potentially balance or stack a particular vote, and that doesn’t seem very positive to me.  Also if we are going to see companies invest more in sending more people to committees for the purpose of raising issues and propagating debates, that would seem to slow things down more than speed them up.


I am not talking about restricting attendance just that I would see it helpful to restrict voting.


A lot of your questions seems to presuppose the answer – which is that you prefer things to remain as they are.  That’s fine but I am just saying things don’t have to stay as they are and could be improved.




+1 781 902 8366

fax: +1 781 902 8009

blog: http://blogs.iona.com/newcomer

Making Software Work Together (TM)


From: David RR Webber (XML) [mailto:david@drrw.info]
Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2006 8:35 AM
To: Newcomer, Eric
Cc: oasis-member-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [oasis-member-discuss] FW: Possible change to TC voting rules - input requested




I'm not completely following what you are saying here?  Why should we be eliminating committee debate?


Having just one company - one vote - is likely to mean that companies invest LESS effort in committees - and surely that is a bad thing?  Also bad is the notion that company staff cannot freely work out differences in the TC process - or participate openly - for me that is the essense of what OASIS is - not fettered by company mandates - but open peer review. 


I'd hate to see the situation where we are institutionalizing companies working behind closed doors to determine their own position(s) and then bringing that to the TC.  Much better that the TC foster open debate.


OASIS is supposed to be a public process that maximizes participation  - how is what you are saying in alignment with that?


Thanks, DW


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [oasis-member-discuss] FW: Possible change to TC voting rules
- input requested
From: "Newcomer, Eric" <Eric.Newcomer@iona.com>
Date: Fri, October 27, 2006 3:53 pm
To: <oasis-member-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org>

I think a one company one vote rule would be an improvement.  It would
help eliminate some amount of committee debate (especially among
representatives of the same company) and help streamline votes.  


+1 781 902 8366
fax: +1 781 902 8009
blog: http://blogs.iona.com/newcomer
Making Software Work Together (TM)

-----Original Message-----
From: member_services@oasis-open.org
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2006 6:57 PM
To: Newcomer, Eric
Subject: Possible change to TC voting rules - input requested

Dear IONA Technologies* Primary Contact

   Please look at the following message about a possible change to TC
voting rules:


  and if you are so inclined please respond as requested to oasis-

Jeff Mischkinsky
Director, Web Services Standards
Consulting Member Technical Staff          
500 Oracle Parkway, M/S 4OP9
Redwood Shores, CA 94065

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