[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: CMIS v1.0 Submitted for OASIS Standard Approval Ballot
OASIS Members: The OASIS Content Management Interoperability Services (CMIS) TC has submitted the following specification, which is an approved Committee Specification, to be considered as an OASIS Standard: Content Management Interoperability Services (CMIS) Version 1.0 The text of the TC submission is appended. You now have through 15 April to familiarize yourself with the submission and provide input to your organization's voting representative. On 16 April, a Call For Vote will be issued to all Voting Representatives of OASIS member organizations. They will have until the last day of April, inclusive, to cast their ballots on whether this Committee Specification should be approved as an OASIS Standard or not. Members who wish to discuss this ballot may do so through email@example.com. In accordance with the OASIS Technical Committee Process, this Committee Specification has already completed the necessary 60-day public review period as noted in the submission below. The normative TC Process for approval of Committee Specifications as OASIS Standards is found at: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process-2009-07-30.php#OASISstandard Any statements related to the IPR of this specification are posted at: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/cmis/ipr.php Your participation in the review and balloting process is greatly appreciated. Mary Mary P McRae Director, Standards Development Technical Committee Administrator OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society email: firstname.lastname@example.org web: www.oasis-open.org twitter: @fiberartisan #oasisopen phone: 1.603.232.9090 ------------ Submission of CMIS v1.0 Committee Specification for consideration as an OASIS Standard Submission Date: 12 March 2010 (a) Links to the approved Committee Specification in the TC's document repository, and any appropriate supplemental documentation for the specification, both of which must be written using the OASIS templates. Editable Source: http://docs.oasis-open.org/cmis/CMIS/v1.0/cs01/cmis-spec-v1.0.doc (Authoritative) HTML: http://docs.oasis-open.org/cmis/CMIS/v1.0/cs01/cmis-spec-v1.0.html PDF: http://docs.oasis-open.org/cmis/CMIS/v1.0/cs01/cmis-spec-v1.0.pdf Namespaces: http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/cmis/core/200908/ http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/cmis/restatom/200908/ http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/cmis/messaging/200908/ http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/cmis/ws/200908/ http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/cmis/link/200908/ (b) The editable version of all files that are part of the Committee Specification; * (see above) (c) Certification by the TC that all schema and XML instances included in the specification, whether by inclusion or reference, including fragments of such, are well formed, and that all expressions are valid; * The CMIS TC certifies that all schema and XML instances included in the specification are well formed, and that all expressions are valid. (d) A clear English-language summary of the specification; * The Content Management Interoperability Services (CMIS) standard defines a domain model and Web Services and Restful AtomPub bindings that can be used by applications to work with one or more Content Management repositories/systems. The CMIS interface is designed to be layered on top of existing Content Management systems and their existing programmatic interfaces. It is not intended to prescribe how specific features should be implemented within those CM systems, not to exhaustively expose all of the CM system’s capabilities through the CMIS interfaces. Rather, it is intended to define a generic/universal set of capabilities provided by a CM system and a set of services for working with those capabilities. For a more detailed summary see the following: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/cmis/download.php/36826/Summary%20of%20CMIS%201.0.pdf (e) A statement regarding the relationship of this specification to similar work of other OASIS TCs or other standards developing organizations; * JSR 170 (aka JCR 1.0) and JSR 283 (aka JCR 2.0), developed under the Java Community Process (JCP), also define an interoperable interface for content management systems. There is no direct relationship between JCR and the CMIS specification. Some CMIS TC members are/were also JSR 283/170 Expert Group members. o JCR is a Java API, whereas CMIS is a protocol-layer interface. The two interfaces can be complementary to each other. For example, a CMIS interface may be layered on top of a JCR repository to provide interoperability between JCR and non-JCR (or non-Java) repositories. o JCR prescribes certain behaviors of a content management system and defines an interface that is fairly functionally complete. CMIS describes a set of basic concepts and functions that can be easily layered on top of existing content management systems for interoperability. Full functionality is not a design goal for CMIS. * WebDAV, developed under the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), is a set of HTTP extensions. It offers some capabilities that are similar to CMIS's. There is no direct relationship between WebDAV and CMIS. CMIS supports multiple network protocols. Its AtomPub protocol binding uses the GET, PUT, POST, and DELETE methods of HTTP but not the WebDAV extensions. o WebDAV was designed to support distributed authoring on the Web using a file system data model. The model and functionality (HTTP methods) are not sufficient to support content management. CMIS concepts, such as typed object, peer-to-peer relationship, rendition, and administrative policy, are not supported by WebDAV. o CMIS supports a simpler versioning model which can be more easily mapped to a content management system's versioning capability than WebDAV's versioning capability (defined by the IETF Delta-V Working Group) can. (f) The Statements of Use presented above; * http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/cmis/email/archives/200912/msg00047.html * http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/cmis/email/archives/200912/msg00089.html * http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/cmis/email/archives/201001/msg00521.html (g) The beginning and ending dates of the public review(s), a pointer to the announcement of the public review(s), and a pointer to an account of each of the comments/issues raised during the public review period(s), along with its resolution; * First public review (60-day) o Dates: 23 October 2009 to 22 December 2009 o Announcement: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/tc-announce/200910/msg00015.html o Comments and resolutions: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/cmis/download.php/35712/Summary%20of%20Public%20Review%20Comments.docx * Second public review (15-day) o Dates: 28 January 2010 to 12 February 2010 o Announcement: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/tc-announce/201001/msg00006.html o Comments and resolutions: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/cmis/download.php/36411/Summary%20of%20Public%20Comments%20-%202.docx (h) An account of and results of the voting to approve the specification as a Committee Specification, including the date of the ballot and a pointer to the ballot; * Result: o 25 of 26 voting members voted "Yes" (96%) o 0 voting member voted "No" (0%) o 0 voting member voted "Abstain" (0%) o 1 voting member did not vote (4%) * Dates: 4 March 2010 to 11 March 2010 * Link: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/cmis/ballot.php?id=1852 (i) An account of or pointer to votes and comments received in any earlier attempts to standardize substantially the same specification, together with the originating TC's response to each comment; * N/A (j) A pointer to the publicly visible comments archive for the originating TC; * http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/cmis-comment/ (k) A pointer to any minority reports delivered by one or more Members who did not vote in favor of approving the Committee Specification, which report may include statements regarding why the member voted against the specification or that the member believes that Substantive Changes were made which have not gone through public review; or certification by the Chair that no minority reports exist. * No minority report exists.