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

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

soa-rm message

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


Subject: RE: [soa-rm] Result of Voting on SOA-RM v1.0 as OASIS Standard


Agree - perhaps we can also try and encourage the commenter to join the
TC (if we have not already), so that they can expand on their concerns
during the 1.1 phase.

Joe

Joseph Chiusano
Associate
Booz Allen Hamilton

700 13th St. NW, Suite 1100
Washington, DC 20005
O: 202-508-6514  
C: 202-251-0731
Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Bashioum, Christopher D [mailto:cbashioum@mitre.org] 
Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 10:11 AM
To: Matt MacKenzie; Jones, Steve G; Chiusano Joseph; Tom Merkle;
soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [soa-rm] Result of Voting on SOA-RM v1.0 as OASIS Standard

I agree with Matt and Steve.  Go to standard, and address any concerns
in version 1.1 if it is deemed necessary.   

-----Original Message-----
From: Matt MacKenzie [mailto:mattm@adobe.com]
Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 9:14 AM
To: Jones, Steve G; Chiusano Joseph; Tom Merkle;
soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [soa-rm] Result of Voting on SOA-RM v1.0 as OASIS Standard

The key here is "opinion".  It is the Avaya voter's "opinion" that the
RM allows architectures that are not SOA classify themselves as SOA.  To
me, that implies that the voter has some pre-ordained ideas of what SOA
is, and that we would not make him/her happy unless our reference model
catered to the opinion held by that individual.

My vote: move to standard.  1/89 is not enough to delay us, because at
the end of the day we really are not going to make revisions to our
specification for one person's opinion.  We can spend a bunch of time in
the interest of "being fair", but the outcome will be the same.

-matt

-----Original Message-----
From: Jones, Steve G [mailto:steve.g.jones@capgemini.com]
Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 9:01 AM
To: Chiusano Joseph; Tom Merkle; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [soa-rm] Result of Voting on SOA-RM v1.0 as OASIS Standard



To play devils advocate here (I'm on a retainer) we've received 89 yes
votes, and for the last several months people have had ample
opportunity.
If Avaya flesh out areas of concern this will either mean we ignore
them
(otherwise we have to go back through the cycle) or we make the changes
which means it counts as an entirely new submission.

I'd propose that we get the feedback and consider it within the scope
of a
1.1 proposal.  

A vague concern that it allows things to be defined as SOA that aren't
in
the opinion of the voter SOA doesn't out weight the over 25% of OASIS
voters
(10% above target) who thought that it did.  Lets shift to standard and
then
look at revisions within the scope of a 1.1 or a 2.0.

Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@bah.com] 
Sent: 02 October 2006 13:38
To: Tom Merkle; Jones, Steve G; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [soa-rm] Result of Voting on SOA-RM v1.0 as OASIS Standard

I second Tom's suggestion - I think it is very fair to both sides. 

Joe

Joseph Chiusano
Associate
Booz Allen Hamilton
 
700 13th St. NW, Suite 1100
Washington, DC 20005
O: 202-508-6514  
C: 202-251-0731
Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Merkle [mailto:TMerkle@capwin.org] 
Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 8:20 AM
To: Jones, Steve G; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [soa-rm] Result of Voting on SOA-RM v1.0 as OASIS Standard

In all fairness, I propose we allow the "no" voter one week to provide
a
detailed analysis of what they consider is wrong or missing with the
SOA-RM specification. If no new information is provided then we move
the
specification to a standard. 


Regards,
 
Tom Merkle
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Jones, Steve G [mailto:steve.g.jones@capgemini.com]
Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 4:58 AM
To: soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: FW: [soa-rm] Result of Voting on SOA-RM v1.0 as OASIS Standard


I propose we submit to full specification.  One negative vote against
89
positives is a pretty ringing endorsement in anyone's book.
Particularly given the comment on the no vote I don't see why we
wouldn't shift to standard.

Steve


-----Original Message-----
From: Mary McRae [mailto:mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org]
Sent: 02 October 2006 00:25
To: members@lists.oasis-open.org; tc-announce@lists.oasis-open.org
Cc: soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [soa-rm] Result of Voting on SOA-RM v1.0 as OASIS Standard

OASIS members:

The ballots for approval of Reference Model for Service Oriented
Architecture v1.0 as an OASIS Standard (announced at [1]) has closed.
There were sufficient affirmative votes to approve the specification.
However, because there was a negative vote, the SOA Reference Model
Technical Committee must decide how to proceed, as provided in the
OASIS
TC Process, at http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php#3.4. A
further announcement will be made to this list regarding their
disposition of the vote.

Mary

[1] http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/members/200609/msg00002.html


---------------------------------------------------
Mary P McRae
Manager of TC Administration, OASIS
email: mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org
web: www.oasis-open.org 


This message contains information that may be privileged or
confidential
and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the
person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient,
you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate,
distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive
this
message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all
copies of this message.

This message contains information that may be privileged or
confidential and
is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the
person
to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient,  you
are not
authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate,  distribute, or
use
this message or any part thereof. If you receive this  message in
error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete all  copies of this
message.


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