[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: FW: submitting v2 to ISO
Regrep TC, As noted below, OASIS management determined that they need to submit the ebXML v2.0 specs for all the ebXML modules for the reasons listed below. These are valid reasons, and we should respect this decision. We had already started the submission for standards process prior to this decision (vote for 30 day public review), so I think we should go ahead with the public review period and submission of v2.1 specs for OASIS membership vote. As soon as the v2.1 specs are approved as OASIS standards, my understanding is that they can also be submitted to ISO for approval. This will probably happen the first part of January, assuming we stay on track with the submission process schedule. Hopefully v3.0 will follow soon after, depending on implementations. Kathryn -----Original Message----- From: Karl F. Best [mailto:karl.best@oasis-open.org] Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 12:25 PM To: Breininger, Kathryn R; Dale Moberg; ian.c.jones Cc: jamie.clark@oasis-open.org Subject: submitting v2 to ISO ebXML chairs: Last week we had some correspondance regarding whether to submit the v2.0 or the v2.1 ebXML specs to ISO. OASIS management has met to discuss this, and have decided that it is imperitive that we submit the v2.0 specs, for the following reasons: * The v2.0 specs were endorsed by CEFACT at their May plenary. By submitting v2.0 we would essentially be preventing any possible interference or objections by CEFACT to these specs, which would not be the case with v2.1. And given what's been going on the last few days I'm sure that we can appreciate how important this could be. * We're worried about drawing out this process. While we would rather submit a matched set of specs, and while the Registry TC may have new OASIS Standards by January, I expect that Messaging and CPPA will be a couple months behind, pushing this submission out by another 4-6 months. We first started talking with ISO about submitting to them a couple years ago, and nearly accomplished this a year ago (before CEFACT interfered). If we postpone again ISO may decide that we aren't really serious about working with them and may quit working with us. * There are a number of v2.0 implementations that we can point to as proof that these are viable specs. We can't say the same for v2.1. Having approval for 2.0 will make it even easier to get approval for later versions, so there's no reason that we can't submit v2.1 next year. We're just afraid that if we don't submit now that the door will start closing on us for the reasons listed above. So I will start completing the submission paperwork with the goal of submitting at the end of the month. We can still talk about this at our JC meeting on the 30th. I still need to get clarification from ISOCS regarding the submission of errata to accompany the specs. -Karl ================================================================= Karl F. Best Vice President, OASIS office +1 978.667.5115 x206 mobile +1 978.761.1648 karl.best@oasis-open.org http://www.oasis-open.org
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]