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

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

tm-pubsubj message

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


Subject: [tm-pubsubj] FW: TC comment list configurations (part 2)



This is Karl's answer. I must admit I feel very uneasy with that issue
now.
But I think every TC member should be aware of it.

| -----Original Message-----
| From: Karl Best [mailto:karl.best@oasis-open.org]
| Sent: jeudi 6 février 2003 14:51
| To: Bernard Vatant
| Cc: larsga@garshol.priv.no; Holger.Rath@empolis.com
| 
| Bernard, Holger, Lars:
| 
| (I've removed the HuML people from this response as a lot of it is TM
| specific.)
| 
| 
| Bernard Vatant wrote:
| > Karl
| >
| > I'm quite puzzled by your message. I don't know about my colleagues
Lars
| > Marius and Holger, but I certainly missed, on purpose, the distinguo
| > between "public comment" and "public discussion". In Topic Maps
land,
| > all standardization process has always been very open and public.
Maybe
| > it's again OASIS rules, but letting people *comment* without ability
to
| > *discuss* is something that I just can't understand, and even less
| > *stand*. "We've heard what you have to say, thanks, we'll take it
into
| > account". This is the way it is done in many places, yes ... why? I
| > wonder. And those places in any case I fly away from.
| > For me, either a process is public, and there is a forum for public
| > discussion, either it is not for some good reason, and all is
private:
| > no public discussion, no public comment. Concerning our TCs
(Published
| > Subjects) work, I don't see *any* reason not to have public
discussion.
| > I would say the more we have, the better.
| 
| While I agree that public discussion is generally a good thing, we now
| have the problem of technical eortk being done by the public instead
of
| by the OASIS TC. The TC Process is quite specific: the TC list is for
| the TC to do the work and the comment list is only for the public to
| send comments to the TC. I usually give TCs a bit of latitude on this,
| but when I see 90%+ of the discussion taking place on the TM comment
| lists rather than the TM TC members lists I begin to wonder if these
| really are TCs or if OASIS is simply providing free public discussion
| lists.
| 
| > The work of Published Subjects TCs is deeply connected with other
| > working groups, like ISO SC34/WG3, or recently XRI, and hopefully
other
| > to come, like OWL. Issues are discussed back and forth. If not on
the
| > public lists, where are those exchanges supposed to be made?
| 
| TCs generally liaise with other organizations by exchanging members.
| 
| > In which way public discussion is a problem? For whom?
| > Why should the discussion be "prevented"?
| 
| I don't want to say that this is about money, but membership dues
| support the technical activities of OASIS, and if we allow our
technical
| work to be conducted in an environment where membership is not
required
| then we have removed any reason for people to join OASIS, which would
| ultimately lead to OASIS not being about to provide these services.
| 
| Membership and money aside, this also dilutes our process and the
value
| of the OASIS name. If anyone can have all of the privileges of
| membership without joining then what value is the consortium itself?
| 
| (Do any other standards organizations provide what you are suggesting
| that we should do? does anyone else allow non-members full access to
the
| discussions of their technical committees?)
| 
| > This latter expression just frightens me ... sorry, I've always been
a
| > man of free speech. Is OASIS the wrong place for that? I hope not.
| 
| "Free" in what sense? I too am in favour of free specch, as in
allowing
| anyone to say what they want to say. But OASIS is in no way obligated
to
| provide a forum for anyone who wants to say anything about anything.
Our
| obligation is to provide what our TC Process describes: a means for TC
| members to discuss their technical work, and a means for the piublic
to
| watch that discussion and to make comment on it.
| 
| Lars Marius Garshol wrote:
|  > | "...Each TC shall be provided upon formation with a general list
| and > | a comment list.... The purpose of the TC comment list is to
| receive
|  > | comments from the public and is not for public discussion. The
|  > | comment list of a TC shall be publicly subscribable. TCs shall
not
|  > | be required to respond to comments...."
| 
|  > I saw this part of the process document, and deliberately ignored
it.
| 
| Obviously. But I can't ignore it; it's my responsibility to enforce
the
| TC Process.
| 
|  > It made no sense to me. The purpose of a TC is to create
technology,
|  > and it seems obvious to me that the greater the involvement of the
|  > public, the better the end result will be.
| 
| That's why we provide means for the public to send their comments to
the
| TC. But we aren't required to provide means for the public to discuss
or
| to participate in the TC without becoming members of OASIS.
| 
|  > The GeoLang TC has had several non-members contribute to the
process
|  > through the comments list, and their comments have definitely
improved
|  > the quality of the end result appreciably. Without the ability to
|  > discuss their comments on the list with them this would not have
been
|  > possible.
| 
| They should join OASIS and the TC if they are interested in
participating.
| 
|  > My only comment is that I can see no reason for doing this. It
cannot
|  > fail to damage the standardization process, and I can't see that
|  > anyone stands to gain anything from it. I realize that OASIS would
|  > rather have people join OASIS and the TCs if they want to
participate,
|  > but my experience is that if people are economically capable of
doing
|  > so (time- and money-wise) they will. And if they are not, the
absence
|  > of a public discussion list will not make them join OASIS; it will
|  > just lock them out of the process altogether.
| 
| In our experience if someone values what OASIS offers they will join.
We
| make it quite simple to do so by offering a variety of levels of
| membership.
| 
| I should further point out that the topicmaps-comment list is not only
| being used for public discussion but is also not associated with any
| single TC. It was formed three years ago in anticipation of a member
| section being formed, which didn't happen because the TM participants
| could never meet the requirements for forming the member section. So
we
| need to find a way to move the discussion of OASIS members to one or
| more of the TC lists.
| 
| -Karl
| 
| =================================================================
| Karl F. Best
| Vice President, OASIS
| +1 978.667.5115 x206
| karl.best@oasis-open.org  http://www.oasis-open.org





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


Powered by eList eXpress LLC