Re: [tosca-interop] Interop Guide - What is the Appropriate Track For Now?

[Thomas Spatzier <thomas.spatzier@de.ibm.com>]

Hi Paul,

so does that mean that we can still keep the timeline for the "core" TOSCA
spec (i.e. don't have to re-do public review and so on) and just start a
draft of another sibling "spec". If that is possible, then I guess it
sounds like a good solution. Because I tend to agree that the document is
more than just hints and tipps on implementation ...

Regards,
Thomas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH
Tivoli Service Automation Manager Development, D2705
Schoenaicher Str. 220, D-71032 Boeblingen, Germany
Phone: +49-7031-16-1219
Email: thomas.spatzier@de.ibm.com

IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH / Vorsitzende des
Aufsichtsrats: Martina Koederitz
Geschäftsführung: Dirk Wittkopp
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen / Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart,
HRB 243294



From:	"Lipton, Paul C" <Paul.Lipton@ca.com>
To:	"tosca-interop@lists.oasis-open.org"
            <tosca-interop@lists.oasis-open.org>,
Cc:	Simon D Moser/Germany/IBM@IBMDE, "Matt Rutkowski
            (mrutkows@us.ibm.com)" <mrutkows@us.ibm.com>, "Probst, Richard
            (richard.probst@sap.com)" <richard.probst@sap.com>,
            "dug@us.ibm.com" <dug@us.ibm.com>
Date:	14.01.2013 19:02
Subject:	[tosca-interop] Interop Guide - What is the Appropriate Track
            For Now?
Sent by:	<tosca-interop@lists.oasis-open.org>



Hi all,

Matt suggested we take this Interop SC discussion offline due to lack  of
time. Here's my concern.

I'm not a lawyer, but what I've always heard is that IP doesn't have to be
an "advanced technology" for a vendor to have an essential claim. IP could
be a specific API or a "page turn," as we've seen before in our industry.
As I see it, I think the Interop Guide, as it currently stands, needs to be
covered by OASIS patent provisions. It is not currently covered.

IMO, the Interop Doc has normative content, e.g., parameter order and
statements like "The PrimaryScript element *must* also be specified in case
the artifact template includes a single script only" (my emphasis). By
placing this document, which might possibly contain IP, in the correct
track as a Standards Track Work Product, we can release it just as quickly
with some limited standing as a CSD just as easily as we could a CND, but
with adequate patent provision protection for the TC members.

However, it is important to note that we are NOT locked into the standards
track for the Interop Guide for v.next at the CSD stage. For v.next, I
believe that we can easily refactor the spec and the interop guide as we
see fit. If we want, we can move all the normative content from the Interop
Guide to the Spec doc, and  return the Interop Guide to the Non-Standards
Track as a true best practices document, with no harm done.

Thanks,
Paul




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php