RE: [unitsml] Current Meeting Ends Wednesday - Please Participate

["Mary McRae" <mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org>]

Hi everyone,

  I just wanted to clarify Craig's statement. The problem with MatML was not
that we didn't think we could garner the 15% vote, but that we did not have 3
organizational members to certify that they were successfully using the
specification, which is a requirement before submitting for OASIS Standard vote.

  We have never had a ballot fail due to insufficient votes.

  I have not listened to the recording so I don't know exactly what was said; if
you are seeking more information about submitting work to other standards
organizations I strongly urge you read the relevant section in the OASIS Liaison
Policy, here:
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/liaison_policy.php#submitwork.

Regards,

Mary



-----------------------------------
Mary P McRae
Manager of TC Administration, OASIS
email: mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org  
web: www.oasis-open.org
phone: 603.232.9090



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Craig Seymour [mailto:craig.seymour@grantadesign.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 4:28 AM
> To: unitsml@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [unitsml] Current Meeting Ends Wednesday - Please Participate
> 
> I'll add my tuppenceworth here.  The OASIS Materials (MatML) Technical
> Committee was recently disbanded by OASIS due to lack of activity.  This
> lack of activity was in no small part due to the obstacles we found
> meeting the final step in the public approval process, which is that 15%
> of the OASIS membership must vote on the standard and 70% (IIRC) of
> those voters must approve the standard.
> 
> Our problem was, of course, that very few of the OASIS membership have
> any interest or expertise in materials data, and we didn't have the
> resource to canvas the ones that do - for example Intel use Granta's
> data materials data management tools, but the members of Intel currently
> in OASIS would be entirely unaware of this; we would have had to
> approach our direct contacts in Intel, get them to join OASIS, become
> voting members and vote.  We would then have to repeat the process until
> we reached the 15% figure.
> 
> Units have a wider applicability than materials, so UnitsML should have
> less of a problem.  However, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the first
> public vote failed to approve the standard.  How many of us have voted
> on some of the more esoteric B2B or encryption standards that have been
> through OASIS in the last few years?
> 
> I have no experience at all with the ISO process.  When and if we pick
> up MatML again, I expect that we'll take it though ASTM.
> 
> Craig
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Gary W. Kramer [mailto:gary.kramer@nist.gov]
> > Sent: 01 July 2008 23:33
> > To: carlisle@nist.gov; unitsml@lists.oasis-open.org
> > Subject: Re: [unitsml] Current Meeting Ends Wednesday - Please
> Participate
> >
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I just finished listening to the audio from the recent UnitsML TC
> meeting
> > and
> > have a couple of comments.
> >
> > I was somewhat surprised to hear Simon say that he can validate the
> > UnitsML
> > schema against the UnitsML NDRs.  Does this mean that someone has
> encoded
> > all
> > the NDRs to make this possible?  Or am I missing something?
> >
> > My second comment concerns the migration to ISO instead of going
> through
> > OASIS
> > to turn UnitsML into a standard.  Are we really sure that we
> understand
> > the
> > OASIS process?  From what I heard in this teleconference, it would
> seem
> > that
> > given the number of standards being developed and the wide range of
> those
> > topics that it would be so difficult to find enough folks (vote
> holders)
> > with
> > the time and expertise to vet all the standards coming out of
> committees
> > that
> > the whole OASIS approval process would grind to a halt.  Perhaps we
> should
> > ask
> > Jamie to attend the next meeting and explain candidly how this next
> step
> > works.  I know we eventually want to take UnitsML to ISO, but I'm
> worried
> > about the international politics component that often seems so
> prevalent
> > in
> > that organization might be a bigger burden and even more difficult to
> > surmount
> > than the OASIS approval process.  I guess that I find it difficult to
> > believe
> > that a committee-recommended-standard candidate would be rejected by
> OASIS
> > just because the vote holders are too busy, too inexperienced with the
> > topic,
> > or too indifferent to bother to vote on it.  We're talking about a
> > technical
> > organization not the US Congress (or my home-owners' association)
> here...
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Gary
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > As a reminder, the current UnitsML TC meeting ends Wednesday,
> > > July 2.  Please participate by email if you have not already done
> > > so.  (Even a "no comment" remark will do.)
> > >
> >
> >
> > >
> >
> > Notes from the teleconference portion are here:
> >
> >
> > > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/unitsml/
> > > download.php/28681/telecon20080625.pdf
> > >
> >
> >
> > >
> >
> > And the audio can be heard here:
> > >
> >
> > http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/downl
> > > oad.php/28678/20080625_8kbps.wma
> > >
> >
> >
> > >
> >
> > -Mark Carlisle
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> > generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in
> > OASIS
> > at:
> > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in
> OASIS
> at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php