[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [regrep] Update on Spec approval process
Farrukh, Actually I think the Red Sox need a whole Pakistani supporters contingent - a la cricket! I don't think baseball would ever be quiet the same again!?! But bottom of the 8th was where I was at - figuring we had another inning here before it is all down to the final strikes! DW ----- Original Message ----- From: "Farrukh Najmi" <Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM> To: <regrep@lists.oasis-open.org> Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 9:52 AM Subject: Re: [regrep] Update on Spec approval process > David Webber (XML) wrote: > > >As the Americans would say - feels like the bottom of the eight. > > > > > As a Bostonian, a Red Sox fan and a Pakistani who was always more > partial to baseball than cricket (shocking really!) I believe > you mean the bottom of the 9th :-) > > And yes, I feel we are at the bottom of the ninth with bases loaded. All > we have to do now is hit that home run and then we can climb all over > each other in a pile (shudder) :-) > > >Or as the English would say - we're into the final days' > >play here and we're not bowling anymore than 75 overs and > >that's your lot! > > > >DW > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Farrukh Najmi" <Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM> > >To: <regrep@lists.oasis-open.org> > >Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 9:43 PM > >Subject: Re: [regrep] Update on Spec approval process > > > > > > > > > >>Matthew MacKenzie wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>>Farrukh, > >>> > >>>I feel that you are rushing this too much. You need to give some of > >>>us a breather to go back and make comments and make thoughtful > >>>suggestions. > >>> > >>>I have not attended any of these review telecons because I felt that > >>>the process was being pushed way too hard. You need to give > >>>reasonable time for those of us who are not full time on this > >>>standard. I understand that you are anxious to move to the next > >>>release, however, I am much more interested in seeing a slow and > >>>stable release cycle with extremely well reviewed products at each > >>>release. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>Fair comment Matt. Not every is able to spend the same amount of time on > >>this. > >> > >>I cant help thinking though, that: > >> > >>-The specs have been out for a month since draft 01 was published. We > >>received many good comments and have addressed them. At this point the > >>comments are drying out. > >> > >>-We have momentum now and the TC is energetically engaged. All we needs > >>is a joint push to deliver this baby. > >> > >>Of course whatever next steps we take will be decided as a team in > >>tomorrow's con call. > >> > >>As always, thanks for your candid feedback. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>>-Matt > >>> > >>>Farrukh Najmi wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>Dear TC members, > >>>> > >>>>I have been educating myself on the OASIS Standards Approval Process > >>>>[1]. > >>>> > >>>>I learned a few relevant an interesting points undre the current rules: > >>>> > >>>>1. A TC *CAN* give TC Approved status to a spec by voice vote in a TC > >>>>telecon meeting. This can be done either by > >>>> > >>>>(a) roll call or > >>>>(b) voice vote ("all those in favor..." etc.) > >>>> > >>>>followed by chair indicating his/her judgment that numbers were met > >>>>(sufficient "yes"s, and no more "nos" than rule permits) > >>>>at which time members can accept that judgment or challenge the > >>>>conclusion (by asking for a roll call). > >>>> > >>>>2. The same voting process is allowed for the vote to send a TC > >>>>APproved spec for public review. > >>>> > >>>>3. Neither vote requires a electronic ballot or a 2 week period. > >>>> > >>>>4. The current process allows the "TC Approval" vote and the "Send to > >>>>Public Review" vote to occur in the same TC telecon meeting. > >>>> > >>>>I have already validated my interpretation of [1] with my colleague > >>>>Eduardo Gutentag <eduardo.gutentag@sun.com> to make sure I did not > >>>>misunderstand anything. > >>>> > >>>>Being a pathelogical optmist I would like to propose that we make > >>>>every effort to have a very high turnout of TC members for tomorrow's > >>>>meeting so that we can have everyone's vote count if we choose to > >>>>have one or both votes tomorrow. Please do your best to attend and > >>>>attend on time. Thanks. > >>>> > >>>>[1] Standards Approval Process > >>>>http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php#standards_approval > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>> > >>> > >>>>Subject: > >>>>Re: Question on spec approval process > >>>>From: > >>>>James Bryce Clark <jamie.clark@oasis-open.org> > >>>>Date: > >>>>Wed, 02 Feb 2005 15:26:41 -0800 > >>>>To: > >>>>Farrukh Najmi <Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM> > >>>> > >>>>To: > >>>>Farrukh Najmi <Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Responses below. Best regards JBC > >>>> > >>>>At 02:43 PM 2/2/2005, Farrukh Najmi wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>Hi Jamie, > >>>>>As I a sure you are already aware, the ebXML Registry 3.0 specs are > >>>>>nearing Committee Draft status. > >>>>>I have the following question on the standards approval process [1] > >>>>>-Can a TC give TC Approved status to a spec by voice vote in a TC > >>>>>telecon meeting (assuming necessary votes were met and duly recorded > >>>>>in TC meeting minutes) ? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> Under current rules, yes. If unanimous, minutes should say so > >>>>and note attendance. If not, minutes should clearly reflect that the > >>>>necessary minimums were met. This can be done either by (a) roll call > >>>>or (b) voice vote ("all those in favor..." etc.) followed by chair > >>>>indicating his/her judgment that numbers were met (sufficient "yes"s, > >>>>and no more "nos" than rule permits) -- at which time members can > >>>>accept that judgment or challenge the conclusion (by asking for a > >>>>roll call). > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>- Once a spec is TC approved, can a TC decide to submit it for > >>>>>public review by voice vote in a TC telecon meeting (assuming > >>>>>necessary votes were met and duly recorded in TC meeting minutes) ? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> Yes. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>- Can the TC Approval vote, and the vote to send TC approved spec to > >>>>>public review, be conducted by 2 separate voice votes in the same TC > >>>>>telecon meeting ? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> Yes. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>My apologies in advance if some of these questions are covered by > >>>>>[1] already. If not you may consider clarifying in a future version. > >>>>>Thanks very much for your help. > >>>>>[1] Standards Approval Process > >>>>>http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php#standards_approval > >>>>>-- > >>>>>Regards, > >>>>>Farrukh > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>> > >>> > >>>>To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster > >>>>of the OASIS TC), go to > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep/members/leave_workgroup .php. > > > > > >>>> > >>>> > >>-- > >>Regards, > >>Farrukh > >> > >> > >>To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of > >> > >> > >the OASIS TC), go to > >http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep/members/leave_workgroup .php. > > > > > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Regards, > Farrukh > > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep/members/leave_workgroup.php. > > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]