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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

rights-examples message

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

Subject: RE: [rights-examples] Change Requests?

Hi Patrick:
I agree with you that the original submission is not the answer to the requirements. I believe others in the spec committee have also stated this. I am not sure how many times we can state this again.
With regards to the change requests, the Spec team followed a process to develop those change requests and voted on them. Granted, if this was a purely serial process, the spec team could have just waited for a final requirements document to be issued. In order to help the RLTC as a whole meet their schedule, they participated in the Requirements SC process to get better visibility of the requirements before the final document was issued. While the changes were at a point that seemed to imply that the requirements were fairly stable, the Spec SC suggested writing change requests based upon the draft requirements document. This was reviewed by the General Body and the Spec SC began their work. When the requirements process did not achieve consensus for version 1 of the spec at the end, the Spec SC stopped all work. There probably are more change requests that may need to be processed but the Spec SC team basically is waiting for the requirements SC to issue a requirements doc for version 1 of the spec.
I think that we should continue to process the SBL comments in the Requirements SC process. This will allow more people to comment and hopefully add to them. From there, if the SC is in agreement, we can include them in the Requirements Document as either changes to what is in the present document or as new requirements. We can then deliver this package to the Spec SC to create the appropriate change requests. The change management process is actually very nice in that it involves debate on the technical merits of each change request with subsequent voting by the members on its processing.

-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Durusau [mailto:pdurusau@emory.edu]
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 4:14 PM
To: rights-examples@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [rights-examples] Change Requests?


Must have been misimpression on my part but when I searched for change 
request documents (finding them thanks to Thomas DeMartini) I found only 
16 requests and the first four or five I examined, while important, were 
not what I would consider to be substantial changes to the original 
submission. I think in order to overcome the general reluctance to go 
forward, there has to be some reasonable expectation that the submission 
as it was a year ago is not what will eventually be presented to the TC 
for voting. Not saying it could not be, the commitee might come to see 
the original submission as the answer to the requirements, but that to 
me seems unlikely.

A number of the comments submitted by the SBL could no doubt be recast 
as change requests. Would that be helpful, duplication?


Patrick Durusau
Director of Research and Development
Society of Biblical Literature
Co-Editor, ISO Reference Model for Topic Maps

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