Re: [security-services] Re: Last-call drafts and call for reviewnow available on website

["Karl F. Best" <karl.best@oasis-open.org>]

Eve:

All this is okay, except that step #4 is not optional; the TC must 
reapprove the CD after the review.

Please send a sentence or two or three to Dee for her to include in the 
weekly news. What you've suggested (with the clarification) is about right.

(Sorry if I started a firestorm; I just wanted to make sure that we were 
all clear about what this step was and wasn't.)

-Karl



Eve L. Maler wrote:
> I'm keeping the cc list here so people can see the conclusion, but I 
> suggested that any finer points should be discussed in private mail.
> 
> Karl, since we're doing this at the TC stage and on the TC's 
> recognizance only, it's prior to the steps you list below.  It's "step 
> 0", if you like.  It goes like this:
> 
> 0. Last-call working draft review
> 1. Approve as CD
> 2. Public review
> 3 and 4. Revise and reapprove as CD (if necessary)
> 5. Vote to submit for OASIS Standard balloting
> 
> Note that this step 0 is a practice of long standing in the SSTC (it 
> predates the current TC process and the mandated 30-day CD review on the 
> way to balloting, for example :-).  Now that I understand the text I was 
> seeing in the TC process doc, I think it's clear that we need not 
> lengthen our planned schedule.  But if you're willing to publicize this 
> review period, then perhaps we modify the second sentence of my 
> suggested blurb to say something like "...and is soliciting review 
> comments and implementor feedback prior to preparing Committee Drafts 
> (after which time the TC will conduct an additional 30-day CD review)."
> 
>     Eve
> 
> Karl F. Best wrote:
> 
>> Rob:
>>
>> You're correct in that the Public Review is optional before the TC 
>> finally approves the spec as a Committee Draft *if* that CD is not 
>> going to be submitted for consideration as an OASIS Standard. If the 
>> CD is going to be submitted then there must be a public review. But as 
>> what is sent out for public review must be approved first as a CD, 
>> maybe where we're at is the first CD approval.
>>
>> We do it like this: 1) approve as CD, 2) public review, 3) revise, 4) 
>> reapprove as CD, 5) vote to submit to OASIS.
>>
>> Steps 1-3 can be repeated as often as desired.
>>
>> My concern is that the TC has invented a new, extra-procedural step 
>> named "last call". This is very confusing, both to people who are 
>> acquainted with the OASIS process and won't know where this fits, as 
>> well as to people who will confuse this with the W3C process.
>>
>> That said, I'm happy for us to announce this "review" (or whatever) to 
>> our members; we should just be clear about where this fits in the 
>> process to avoid confusion.
>>
>> -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