, Dave Ings of IBM contacted Laurent
Liscia with a "request that the comments be withdrawn until
they have been reviewed, approved and minuted by the
appropriate TC(s)." Later that day, Jamie Clark sent an email
to the SC38 Secretariat,
characterizing the comments as "
premature, and not yet
finalized or approved" and asking that they be withdrawn.
The purported problem was
stated as a process issue, although after consulting with
Chet Ensign, it is not clear there is any required policy or
process that was not followed. Nonetheless, it seems
prudent to seek an endorsement from this committee in line
with what was requested by Dave Ings to satisfy any
perceived breaches in openness or the development of
Today, Peter Brown and I spoke with Martin Chapman, JTC 1/SC38 Liaison to
OASIS, and Heather Kreger, who serves as The Open
Group chair for their RA work and editor for SC38 Working
Group 2. (Note, Peter and I are OASIS Liaisons to SC38.) After the call,
I reported the following to Chet and Jamie:
Peter and I had a very productive discussion with Heather
and Martin. As will happen, the disconnects can be laid to
a number of misunderstandings and misinterpretations. In
hindsight, a few well-timed phone calls could have defused
We discussed the scheduled SOA-RM TC meeting on Wednesday
and agreed that a minuted endorsement of the comment
submission will be sufficient to establish the provenance of
the comments. I expect we will use something along the
lines of your proposed wording.
Do members of the SOA-RM Technical Committee approve the
submitting of collected comments on the following three
1. ISO/IEC WD 18384, Distributed
Application Platforms and Services (DAPS) - Reference
Architecture for Service Oriented Architecture (SOA RA)
2. ISO/IEC WD 18384, Distributed
Application Platforms and Services (DAPS) – Reference
Architecture for SOA Solutions
3. ISO/IEC WD 1 18384 Part
3, Distributed Application Platforms and Services
(DAPS) – SOA Ontology
If this endorsement is approved, we ask that you and
Jamie do whatever is necessary to immediately resubmit the
Heather said she had finished initial adjudication of the
comments and was prepared to accept on the order of 100.
Many of the remainder require additional discussion. It is
often difficult to adequately capture a complicated
technical issue in the space of a spreadsheet cell, and the
comment submission serves to begin a discussion rather than
just present a closed end suggestion for rewording text.
During our call today, we began that discussion.
Please let me know if anything else is required?
Chair, SOA-RM Technical Committee
As noted in the previously distributed agenda, the purpose
of the Wednesday meeting is to discuss and, as appropriate,
consider and respond affirmatively to the question detailed
above. Your attendance at the meeting and your opinions will
be greatly appreciated.
Dr. Kenneth Laskey
MITRE Corporation, M/S H305
7515 Colshire Drive fax:
McLean VA 22102-7508