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

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

sca-bindings message

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


Subject: Re: Groups - oasis - Ballot "SCA service wsdlElement pointing toa WSDL service" has closed


Anyone know who should be informed that the ballot mailer cannot count?

workgroup_mailer@lists.oasis-open.org wrote:
> OASIS Service Component Architecture / Bindings (SCA-Bindings) TC member,
>
> A ballot presented to OASIS Service Component Architecture / Bindings (SCA-Bindings) TC has closed.
> The text of this closed ballot is as follows:
> ---
> "SCA service wsdlElement pointing to a WSDL service"
> Do you think we should define the behaviour of wsdlElement on an SCA service pointing to a WSDL service, and if so, what should the behaviour be?
>
> - We should disallow this case
> - We should allow this case but say nothing
> - We should allow this case and require the runtime to provide at least one of the ports, possibly more
> - We should allow this case and require the runtime to provide all of the matching ports
> - Other
>
> ---
>
> Quick Summary of Voting Results: 
>  - We should disallow this case received 9 Votes
>  - We should allow this case but say nothing received 0 Votes
>  - We should allow this case and require the runtime to provide at least one of the ports, possibly more received 0 Votes
>  - We should allow this case and require the runtime to provide all of the matching ports received 6 Votes
>
>  15 of 17 eligible voters cast their vote before the deadline.
>   
If you actually look at the ballot page, only ten people voted:
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/sca-bindings/ballot.php?id=1674

Since we were allowed to vote for two options, that apparently
hopelessly confuses the balloting system.

Of the ten people who voted, nine voted for "we should disallow this case."

I'm not sure if the "may vote for two" option was intended as "instant
runoff", but if it were, then that suggests that people like myself who
only voted for one item "lost" a vote.  Arguably, if I only voted for
one option, does that mean that my vote should count twice?  If so, you
could tabulate it as:
14 votes for "we should disallow".
6 votes for "allow, but match all ports"

Seems like another demonstration that voting systems are unavoidably biased.

-Eric.
> Voting results for all closed ballots are available on the sca-bindings eVote Archive at:
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/sca-bindings/ballot_archive.php
>
> Thank you,
> OASIS Open Administration


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