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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

pps message

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

Subject: Re: [pps] CSD submission request form needed for PPS v1.0

> Dear Robin Cover,
> Thank you for your support for our TC process.
> Since I had miss understanding the naming rule of our document,
> I hade mistake in publishing the CSD that has a title of CSPRD.

Yasuyuki Nishioka (and TC members)

I apologize sincerely for being unable to respond before now, as
other TC Admin transition obligations have occupied my time.
We are organizing the work with two additional Staff members
(Chet Ensign and Paul Knight) so processing time should
improve a lot.

I now understand that the TC's request for "30-day Committee
Specification Draft Review Request for Production Planning and
Scheduling (PPS), Version 1.0"  [1] signals the TC intent to both
approve a Working Draft as CSD (for publication) and also to
advance the CSD to 30-day public review.

The fact that your CSD request was omitted is not a significant
problem, but upon inspection I see that we need to take one
small step back in any case.

In order to qualify the CSD for "Production Planning and Scheduling
(PPS) Version 1.0", the new (October 2010) requirements in TC
Process together with the TC Handbook and Naming Directives
need to be followed [2].  The candidate for CSD as balloted
has a couple issues that need to be fixed before the Work Product
can be published.  Fortunately, these are relatively minor.  When
you have prepared a corrected/updated Working Draft for CSD,
you can ballot for both CSD and CSPRD in the same meeting,
and submit the two requests to TC Admin at the same time,
indicating that TC Admin may process both for publication at the
same time.

Three items must be fixed, and I draw attention to a couple other
items which you may wish to consider as you make the
revisions in the Working Draft.

1. XML Namespace name (URI reference identifying the namespace)

It is given in the submitted prose specification and in the XML Schema
file (pps-schema-1.0.xsd) as "http://docs.oasis-open.org/pps/2009";.

There was a revision in the Naming Guidelines of 2008-10-09 [3] which
required any HTTP scheme NS URI (string) to use the explicit /ns/ path
element.  This requirement was narrowed further in the Naming Directives
(October 2010) to permit only the format
http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/[tc-shortname]/xxxx.  The namespace
name in the WD as balloted does not conform to the 2008-10-09 or
2010-10 rules.   I will be happy to review your decision on a revised
identifier string, but I hope the Naming Directives document is clear.
Not rocket science.

2. The new Naming Directives prescribes the use of distinct directories
corresponding to each maturity level (stage, or "release") for /csd01/,
/csd02/, /csprd01/, /csprd02/ [...] /cs01/ etc..  Therefore, the current
Working Draft assertion "... the XML schema that can be
downloaded from the schema URI.
http://docs.oasis-open.org/pps/v1.0/pps-schema-1.0.xsd " can't be
supported in our publication process.  [Similarly, the URIs as proposed
on the cover page cannot be used.]

I will be happy to assist in making suggestions or review of the
expected URI scheme for your upcoming CSD so that the rules
of the Naming Directives are met:


We will also need to adjust the specification URIs for
"This Version:", "Previous Version:", "Latest Version:" when we
have settled on the desired URI pattern(s).

3. Revision History - now a required Appendix

== Suggestions ==

4. The TC may wish to consider candidate resources to be named on the
specification cover page for "Related work".  We typically provide a
reference to any associated schemas or other machine-readable
artifacts in this block, but if you know of other specifications which
merit attention/visibility, you are welcome to nominate them.

5.  Just a question (point of information for me)

In two locations I spotted this string (identified as a "namespace" value)


4.1.2 Structure of profile definitions
Example:  Application profile definition


Example: A message created on the implementation profile

It's unclear to me whether the construction is intentional; the
format looks suspiciously like an error for "http:// "  viz.,

If the specification design seeks to create an identifier string
(functioning merely as fixed string-identifier), you may want
to consider the following as an alternative:


Many TCs use HTTP-scheme URIs (URI references) built upon the (base)
declared namespaces to create identifiers for named properties,
functions, dialects, faults, actions, or any named message types.
One advantage is that such URI references provide a natural
mechanism for self-documentation: when dereferenced via DNS+HTTP,
they will retrieve the namespace document which documents the
namespace and associated specification which declares it (in this
case, the PPS Version 1.0 specification).

That's enough for now.  I anticipate a couple followon conversations
to clarify an agreement about the publication URIs per item #2

Please feel free to contact me or Chet Ensign (new OASIS TC Admin)
with questions/followups.  Chet's email address: chet.ensign@oasis-open.org

- Robin Cover

[1] http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/TCADMIN-440

[2] October 2010
TC Process:  http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process-2010-07-28.php
Handbook: http://docs.oasis-open.org/TChandbook/
Naming:   http://docs.oasis-open.org/specGuidelines/ndr/namingDirectives.html
Request Forms: http://docs.oasis-open.org/templates/TCAdminRequests15-10-2010.html

[3] Naming Guidelines Version 08

[4] Naming Directives
"An XML namespace name identified by an HTTP scheme URI reference must
conform to the pattern:
http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/[tc-shortname]/xxxx  [...]"

On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 4:35 PM, Yasuyuki Nishioka <nishioka@hosei.ac.jp> wrote:
> Dear Robin Cover,
> Thank you for your support for our TC process.
> Since I had miss understanding the naming rule of our document,
> I hade mistake in publishing the CSD that has a title of CSPRD.
> The document
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/pps/download.php/41328/pps-1.0-CSPRD04.zip
> is really the candidate for public review of our committee draft,
> and the TC members had voted whether of not the draft is committee
> draft and pursue to public review process (see ballot result
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/pps/ballot.php?id=2003 ).
> If it is required, I am willing to update the CSD that has the same content
> but retitled.
> Please let me your suggestion.
> Best regards,
> Yasu
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Robin Cover" <robin@oasis-open.org>
> Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 2:47 PM
> To: "PPS TC List" <pps@lists.oasis-open.org>; "Yasuyuki Nishioka"
> <nishioka@hosei.ac.jp>; "Koichi Wada" <wada@kt.rim.or.jp>; "Hiroaki Machida"
> <machida@pslx.org>
> Cc: "Robin Cover" <robin@oasis-open.org>; "Paul Knight"
> <paul.knight@oasis-open.org>
> Subject: [pps] CSD submission request form needed for PPS v1.0
>> Dear Yasuyuki Nishioka, Koichi Wada, Hiroaki Machida, and TC members:
>> Thank you for your submission request form for public review
>> of the specification "Production Planning and Scheduling (PPS)
>> Version 1.0":
>> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/pps/201104/msg00000.html
>> Before we can publish the PR version and announce public review,
>> we need to prepare a CSD (Committee Specification Draft) and
>> publish it in the OASIS Library.  To support that separate
>> operation, you should complete the online request form for CSD.
>> The CSD submission request form you need to complete is:
>> Committee Specification Draft Creation / Upload Request
>> http://marypmcrae.com/csd-creation-request
>>  available from:
>> http://docs.oasis-open.org/templates/TCAdminRequests15-10-2010.html
>> For clarification on the need to use separate CSD and
>> CSPRD forms to support the two TC Admin workflow processes,
>> please see the memo sent to OASIS Members on 21 March 2011 [1].
>> When the CSD has been published, it's relatively easy to
>> process the public review request (which you have already
>> submitted), as PR only requires a couple additional
>> elements [diff, etc]. [2]
>> Kindest regards and best wishes,
>> - Robin
>> Robin Cover
>> Interim TC Administrator
>> OASIS, Director of Information Services
>> Editor, Cover Pages and XML Daily Newslink
>> Email: robin@oasis-open.org
>> Staff bio: http://www.oasis-open.org/who/staff.php#cover
>> Cover Pages: http://xml.coverpages.org/
>> Newsletter: http://xml.coverpages.org/newsletterArchive.html
>> Tel: +1 972-296-1783
>> [1] Subject: OASIS TC Process: Reminders, Clarifications, Updates
>>    From: Robin Cover <robin@oasis-open.org>
>>    To: OASIS Chairs List <chairs@lists.oasis-open.org>,
>>    TC Members <tcmembers@lists.oasis-open.org>
>>    Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 20:52:34 -0400 (EDT)
>> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/tcmembers/201103/msg00000.html
>> See: "Are separate submission request forms needed for CD and PR?"
>> ==============================================================
>> #3 Are separate submission request forms needed for CD and PR?
>> ==============================================================
>> Yes. TCs sometimes combine into a single meeting (or motion)
>> the approval of a WD at CSD/CND level and approval to advance
>> the CD to Public Review status.  The TC Process allows direct
>> progression of a CSD or CND to CSPRD/CNPRD without an
>> intervening WD, but the CD - PR requests to TC Admin should be
>> made separately, using two different online forms, available
>> from the document titled "TC Administration Requests".
>> TC Administration Requests
>> http://docs.oasis-open.org/templates/TCAdminRequests15-10-2010.html
>> See in that document the section: "Public Review Requests"
>> Different forms are used for different kinds of reviews. If
>> a TC desires a review period longer than the required
>> minimum number of days: use the form most similar to the
>> intent and present the special request in the Note field.
>> [2] CD (CSD) and Public Review approval process
>> 3.1 Approval of a Committee Draft
>> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process-2010-07-28.php#committeeDraft
>> TC Handbook: Committee Specification Drafts
>> http://docs.oasis-open.org/TChandbook/Reference/CommitteeSpecDrafts.html
>> -----
>> 3.2 Public Review of a Committee Draft
>> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process-2010-07-28.php#publicReview
>> TC Handbook: Committee Draft Public Reviews
>> http://docs.oasis-open.org/TChandbook/Reference/PublicReviews.html
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
>> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
>> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php

Robin Cover
OASIS, Director of Information Services
Editor, Cover Pages and XML Daily Newslink
Email: robin@oasis-open.org
Staff bio: http://www.oasis-open.org/who/staff.php#cover
Cover Pages: http://xml.coverpages.org/
Newsletter: http://xml.coverpages.org/newsletterArchive.html
Tel: +1 972-296-1783

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