RE: PLCS TC - the next edition ????

Thanks Howard

One thought …. The changes are to the EXPRESS, so are therefore to the modules …. I heard that we were not allowed to do a TC on a module, it had to be a 2^nd edition. Is that correct?

Regards
Rob

-------------------------------------------
Rob Bodington
Eurostep Limited
Web Page: http://www.eurostep.com http://www.share-a-space.com
Email: Rob.Bodington@eurostep.com
Phone: +44 (0)1452 810 960 (note new number)
Mobile: +44 (0)7796 176 401

-----Original Message-----
From: Mason, Howard (UK) [mailto:howard.mason@baesystems.com]
Sent: 06 July 2006 14:03
To: Rob Bodington; plcs-tog@lists.oasis-open.org; plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: PLCS TC - the next edition ????

I attach for your information the relevant extract from the SC4 Handbook on Change Management, which highlights the relevant options.

Either Amendment or Revision (to get a new edition) require the normal ballot cycle. TCs can be issued by the Working Groups. Minor revisions, resulting in a complete new document, require an FDIS ballot.

In response to Rob's questions:

This raise several questions about the TC process.

1) How long does it take to produce a TC?

HGM> drafting time plus a couple of weeks to approve and process in ISO

2) What do we need to produce? A complete new AP package?

HGM> Not for a TC - you might wish to generate a monor revision if htere are many changes

3) Does it require a ballot process?

HGM> Not for a TC - just agreement in the WG

4) How many can we produce? I.e should we wait until we have a number of issues addressed then release the TC, or release a TC everytime we address an issue?

HGM Wait- there is normally a maximum of two TC before you issue a new edition - sometimes can stretch to three.

5) Can we make major modifications in the TC? E.g. bring the Risk module, address the config management of tasks, or should we just address clear errors like missing select extensions

HGM> This sounds like a new edition - we can hardly call it a minor revision.. Just fix errors in a TC.

From: Rob Bodington [mailto:rob.bodington@eurostep.com]
Sent: 19 June 2006 14:48
To: plcs-tog@lists.oasis-open.org; plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org; Mason, Howard (UK)
Subject: PLCS TC - the next edition ????

*** WARNING ***

This mail has originated outside your organization,
either from an external partner or the Global Internet.
Keep this in mind if you answer this message.

I was wondering what the process for producing a Technical Corrieganda PLCS would be.

As we are developing the capabilities, we are finding some selects that should have been extended. In a couple of cases, this is preventing us from completing the capabilities, or forcing us to represent something in a less optimal way.

I was thinking that we need a formal process for dealing with modifications to the AP that takes into account the short term requirements to make fixes to the AP for implementations and the requirement to ensure that these fixes are rolled back into the ISO document.

My proposal is that we:

1) Record the issues against AP239 in a single issue log in dexlib – i.e. dexlib/docs/issues/ap239_issues.xml

2) Raise the issue as SEDS so that they are registered against ISO 10303-239, recoding the seds number in the issue log

3) Copy the EXPRESS models for the AP to DEXLIb. Have two files. One a concatenation of all module ARMs, and the other being the long form derived from the ARMs. Fix the EXPRESS according to the issue.

4) Modify the capabilities to use the modified EXPRESS and include a note in the capability referring to the issue and SEDs and to say that it deviates from the standard, but that the issue has been raised against the standard.

5) At some point in time, raise a TC against PLCS.

This raise several questions about the TC process.

1) How long does it take to produce a TC?

2) What do we need to produce? A complete new AP package?

3) Does it require a ballot process?

4) How many can we produce? I.e should we wait until we have a number of issues addressed then release the TC, or release a TC everytime we address an issue?

5) Can we make major modifications in the TC? E.g. bring the Risk module, address the config management of tasks, or should we just address clear errors like missing select extensions

I realise that this opens a potential Pandora’s box of changes that we might be tempted to make, but given where we are with PLCS, I think that we should limit the TC to fixing errors.

What does everyone think?

In the mean time, I will create:

1) The issue log at: dexlib/docs/issues/ap239_issues.xml

2) The EXPRESS files:
dexlib/docs/ap239/ap239_arm_lf.exp dexlib/docs/ap239/ap239_arm_lf.xml (derived from ap239_arm_lf.exp)
dexlib/docs/ap239/ap239_arm_sf.exp dexlib/docs/ap239/ap239_arm_sf.xml (derived from ap239_arm_lf.exp)

Regards
Rob

plcs-tog message