RE: RM for SOA moving to Committee Specification

[Mary McRae <marypmcrae@gmail.com>]

Hi Duane,

  Just a few points of clarification on the TC Minutes - I copied Item 8 from the document attached so I could comment inline [mpm]
(see below).

  In order to submit for public review I need links to the specification in 3 required formats: source, PDF and HTML
(http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php#2.18). 

  I also see mention of a new subcommittee in the minutes; as soon as I receive a request with the necessary information
(http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php#2.14) I'll be happy to set up the Kavi subgroup, mailing list, and wiki.

Regards,

Mary

---------------------------------------------------
Mary P McRae
OASIS 
Manager of TC Administration
email: mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org  
web: www.oasis-open.org 
phone: 603.232.9090
cell: 603.557.7985
OASIS Symposium: The Meaning of Interoperability, 9-12 May, San Francisco http://www.oasis-open.org/events/symposium_2006/


 

====================
Item 8: Specification Issues:
  - Action Items from last minutes

    -- Status of CD 1.0
.  
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/soa-rm/download.php/16576/wd-soa-rm-cd1ED.pdf

This is the version that we will keep as the official document

Q: what are next steps, especially considering new timelines from OASIS
A: Need to vote on the CD, and change title of it to public review draft.  The TC administrator will send it out and make call for
IP disclosure.  Any comments that come back by any "other" means.  If *any* changes need to be made, draft needs to be withdrawn and
new review cycle starts.  After 1st public review, then any subsequent review can only comment on changes made as result of the
first review.

[mpm] Typically a document will go out for a 60-day public review and during that time the TC accumulates comments and may or may
not make a determination on their disposition as received. At the end of the comment period, the TC determines what, if any, changes
need to be made. If those changes are deemed to be non-substantive in nature, the draft is updated and a ballot is held to move to
Committee Specification status. If changes are required tha result in substantive changes, another review cycle is mandated before a
CS vote can be held. 

1st public review takes 60 days
Subsequent public reviews are for 15 days

[mpm] minimum of 15 days; can be longer at TC's request

TC does not have to accept all comments


Ken made motion to accept document as committee draft - with possible changes to contributors' list.
Motion was seconded

The specific document referenced in link above is now our committee draft

[mpm] Not quite - it needs to have at least the cover page with document status and date and running footers updated.

Must save redlines, and submit to OASIS at the end of the process.  I.e., must track all comments and dispositions to the document
through the rest of the process.

[mpm] yes to must track comments/disposition; redline only required if sending out for second public review

Ken made motion to move the current approved CD 1.0 to Committee Specification - and public review
Motion was seconded
No one opposed - document moved to public review

[mpm] Committee Specification status *follows* public review and an electronic ballot must be run by TCAdmin. A Committee Draft is
moved to Public Review Draft.

Need to change Committee Draft to Committee Specification
Action: is the name Public Review, or Committee Specification?
Action: Duane to check with OASIS as to nomenclature for the numbering of the document as a public review draft (i.e., Public Review
1.0, or Public Review 01, or whatever)

[mpm] Public Review Draft is sufficient, along with the date that the motion passed. Once the public review cycle is complete and no
substantive changes are deemed necessary, the TC can move to have TC Admin start a ballot for CS Status.

Action: Frank to take out prospective members from the acknowledgements section.

Q: when will public review begin?
A: OASIS determines that.  OASIS rules state that they will act within a week of getting public review draft.

Action: Duane to contact OASIS to let them know we are ready to go  

-- Status of home page
Home page will need to be updated to reflect contributor status, member status, and committee specification and public review


 -- Status of contributors list 

Danny Thornton to be moved to member (from prospective member), and kept on contributors' list.  All other Prospective members to be
removed from the list

Comment to update format of contributors list to be tabular

Action: Chris to contact Mike Zeramba to have his primary representative contact Duane via email stating that he has been given
green light to become member

Action: Frank to add Gioti Namjoshi from P Systems Unlimited as contributor.
Action: Chris to confirm that no one else sent email asking to be contributor that is not listed in CD


- RA Work in depth
A Few things needed to TC to approve the subcommittee.  

Duane read the rules for the TC creating the subcommittee.  TC may, by resolution, create a subcommittee in today's call.

Exact text from email:
Attendees at meeting to discuss RA subcommittee:

Theo Beack
Duane Nickull
Joe Chiusano
Michael Stiefel
Al Brown
Danny Thornton
Greg Kohring
Ken Laskey
Jeff Estefan
Frank McCabe

Name: The OASIS Service Oriented Architecture Reference Architecture Sub-Committee

Purpose: To develop one or more Reference Architectures for SOA based on the current SOA RM (versions 1 and later as appropriate).

Deliverables: One or more reference architecture specifications containing descriptions of the Reference Architecture(s).

Chair: Frank McCabe (Note: No other persons were nominated to be chair)

Process:

We will use an special OASIS email list just for the subcommittee, together with a WIKI and a folder in KAVI for documents and other
artifacts associated with the work.
We will have regular telephone conferences, alternating with the SOA RM TC every other week. (I.e. every other Wednesday, on those
weeks where the SOA RM TC is not meeting)

Technical Discussions:

There was a wide ranging discussion about many topics; including issues about the scope of the RA, whether it includes POA, BPM etc.
how concrete it should be, whether issues involving migration from stovepipe systems to service markets was included, and so on.

There was some thought about what an Reference Architecture actually is. This will probably evolve some, but in essence it seems
that it is an architectural design pattern; with, of course, a focus for us on architecting SOAs.

We will need to evolve a set of requirements. This process will be critical in determining if we need more than one RA.

Note: Chair of subcommittee can be both an editor and a contributor

Motion made to have separate OASIS mailing list for SOA RM RA Subcommittee
Motion seconded

Motion made to form the subcommittee
Motion seconded

No-one opposed to the above to motions.

Discussion that there is great interest in other venues about the SOA RM and the SOA RA.  This should be subject of next SOA RA
conference call.  Need to do reach-out within OASIS members that the RA SC is being started.

Discussion of SOA RA SC scheduling.  

Q: Should we change our current every-other week conference call to focus 1/2 hour on SOA RM TC, and a whole hour on SOA RA?
A: No - expect SOA RM TC to start getting busier with public review
- question withdrawn


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Duane Nickull [mailto:dnickull@adobe.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 1:24 PM
> To: James Bryce Clark; Carol Geyer; mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org
> Cc: soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RM for SOA moving to Committee Specification
> Importance: High
> 
> Dear OASIS staff:
> 
> I am happy to announce that the SOA RM TC has approved a 
> motion to advance the current Committee Draft to Committee 
> Specification, as recorded in the attached minutes.  You will 
> shortly receive a document from the editors that is titled 
> "Public Review Draft" as per OASIS Procedure.  We are just 
> finalizing the  contributors list for that document today.
> 
> I would like to formally request that you begin the steps to 
> get the 60 day initial public review underway.
> 
> Duane Nickull
> 
> *******************************
> Adobe Systems, Inc. - http://www.adobe.com Vice Chair - 
> UN/CEFACT  http://www.uncefact.org/ Chair - OASIS SOA 
> Reference Model Technical Committee Personal Blog - 
> http://technoracle.blogspot.com/
> ******************************* 
> 
>