TC Members
A quick straw poll please, replies in next 24 hours if possible. Which way dos anyone feel we should go? Seems like the fix now option is the best in the
long run even though it introduces a little delay?
No doubt Peter can fix the link to his website and I’ll sort out the other two links which UK Gov has moved.
John
From: Chet Ensign [mailto:chet.ensign@oasis-open.org]
Sent: 12 December 2012 14:44
To: John Borras
Cc: Paul Knight; Anne Hendry; TGF TC List
Subject: Re: [tgf] Question re TGF Pattern Language Core COS01
You don't want to do that. The TC Process says that if you make changes to the COS, you start over with a new CSD.
The faster route would be to put it up for the ballot, approve and publish the OS, and then create an Errata with the links fixed. The process would be:
- Create an Errata draft as a Committee Specification Draft and a copy of the OS with applied errata to go with it. Put that out for 15 day public review.
- After the review, vote to approve it as an Approved Errata. We then publish the Approved Errata and the OASIS Standard with Approved Errata and update the Latest Version links to point to the OS with Approved Errata.
This is all covered under section 3.4.2 Public Review of a Candidate OASIS Standard. (Sorry to bore with a long email but want you to know your options...) Choices and timelines are:
1. Fix now as Non-Material Change, vote for CS, vote again to COS. The hit is about 3 weeks to get back where we are now.
2. Proceed with 60 day public review. *If* no comments received during the review, go to OS vote. *If* OS vote passes, publish OS and proceed with Errata. No hit timewise, some extra steps & time for you at the end.
3. Proceed with 60 day public review. *If* comments received on the broken links, request Sp Maj Vote to continue to OS vote anyway. If OS vote passes, continue with errata process. The hit is an extra 8 to 10 days while you take the steps
to request the ballot, etc.
4. Proceed with 60 day public review. Proceed with OS vote. If OS vote fails to pass, go back to CSD stage and start again.
So, your safest option is to fix it now, incurring about another 3 weeks to work things through. The other options carry some risk, mainly of negative PR and possible impact on the OS vote. If you get through the OS vote ok, you can fix
with the errata process after the OS is published.
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 9:26 AM, John Borras <johnaborras@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
Is it alright to carry on with the Public Review and then correct them as part of the comments process? Surely that’s a quicker route?
John
Hi all,
I have a question for the TC. We found several broken links in the TGF Pattern Language Core as we prepared the Candidate OASIS Standard.
Before we go any further with processing I'm checking to see if you want to proceed to the public review and OS vote with these broken links in the document.
If you prefer to fix them, here are the steps to take.
1. You can treat them as Non-Material Changes. Fix them, keep a log of the changes, create a new working draft and request a ballot to approve it as a new CS.
2. After that ballot closes, we'll expedite publishing of the fixed CS. You can then request a new ballot to approve the CS as a COS.
3. After that ballot passes, we will be back on track.
If you simply want us to proceed with the current draft. just let me know. The choice is up to you.
--
/chet
----------------
Chet Ensign
Director of Standards Development and TC Administration
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society
http://www.oasis-open.org
Primary: +1 973-996-2298
Mobile: +1 201-341-1393