RE: [ws-rx] Draft teleconf minutes for 18 August 2005

["Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>]

Cool, then we could relive the whole call in real time!  That would
certainly keep comments and corrections to a minimum...  ;-)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gilbert Pilz [mailto:Gilbert.Pilz@bea.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 1:59 PM
> To: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [ws-rx] Draft teleconf minutes for 18 August 2005
> 
> +1 to recording the minutes. Writing them down, especially on a
> concall
> where you can't actually see who is talking, is pretty painfull. If we
> recorded the minutes we could pretend to be hip podcasters and all
> that
> . . .
> 
> - g
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Abbie Barbir [mailto:abbieb@nortel.com]
> > Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 7:53 AM
> > To: Christopher B Ferris; ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
> > Subject: RE: [ws-rx] Draft teleconf minutes for 18 August 2005
> >
> >
> >
> > Basically, person X should be able to ensure that the minutes
> > reflect what he/she said.
> >
> > Of course, you can solve all the problems by having the
> > minutes recorded.
> > This also solves the problem of appointing a scribe.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Abbie
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Christopher B Ferris [mailto:chrisfer@us.ibm.com]
> > > Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 10:22 AM
> > > To: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > Subject: RE: [ws-rx] Draft teleconf minutes for 18 August 2005
> > >
> > >
> > > Ultimately, it is the TC that has responsibility for approving the
> > > minutes. If someone requests a change, and the rest of the TC
> > > disagrees with that change (revisionist history), then IMO
> > it should
> > > not be made.
> > >
> > > Personally, I would tend to give the benefit of the doubt to the
> > > person to whom scribed notes are attributed. Thus far, I
> > haven't seen
> > > any changes requested that are inconsistent with my recollection
> of
> > > what was said on the call.
> > >
> > > As long as the requested changes are recorded on the email
> > list, that
> > > should be more than adequate as a record of what was changed. If
> > > someone chooses to take exception to a requested change,
> > they should
> > > do so on the list so that it can be discussed and reconciled in
> > > accordance to the TC's wishes during the approval of the minutes.
> > >
> > > Maybe we should all be prefacing our spoken points during a
> meeting
> > > with:
> > > "permission
> > > to revise and extend my remarks for the record?" :-)
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Christopher Ferris
> > > STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
> > > email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
> > > blog: http://webpages.charter.net/chrisfer/blog.html
> > > phone: +1 508 377 9295
> > >
> > > "Abbie Barbir" <abbieb@nortel.com> wrote on 08/19/2005 09:55:06
> AM:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Ashok,
> > > >
> > > > History (views, reasons, etc..) changes(or can be rewritten) (it
> > > > depends on who is recording it, have you read history books
> > > in other
> > > > countries.
> > > >
> > > > Having an amendment as you describe means whatever the
> > > scirbe misheard
> > > > or misrecoreded will be documented regardless of what X has
> > > stated on
> > > > the call, which should not be the case.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Abbie
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Ashok Malhotra [mailto:ashok.malhotra@oracle.com]
> > > > > Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 9:36 AM
> > > > > To: Paul Cotton; Gilbert Pilz
> > > > > Cc: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > > > Subject: RE: [ws-rx] Draft teleconf minutes for 18 August 2005
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Changing minutes can come close to rewriting history.
> > > > > In this case, it is possible that the scribe misheard or
> > > > > misrecorded Paul's words but, in the general case, someone can
> > > > > assert a different position to what was taken on the telcon.
> > > > >
> > > > > I recommend, therefore, that the minutes not be changed but an
> > > > > amendment record be added saying "X has requested the
> following
> > > > > changes to the minutes ...".
> > > > >
> > > > > All the best, Ashok
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Paul Cotton [mailto:pcotton@microsoft.com]
> > > > > > Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 5:12 AM
> > > > > > To: Gilbert Pilz
> > > > > > Cc: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > > > > Subject: RE: [ws-rx] Draft teleconf minutes for 18 August
> 2005
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for taking the minutes.  Here are some
> > proposed changes:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1.  Paul: David spoke directly about some discussions
> > that took
> > > > > > place during (prior?) the forming of the charter. I
> > > wouldn't have
> > > > > > permitted this (missed some of this)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please replace this with:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > >Paul: David spoke directly about some discussions
> > that took
> > > > > > > >place
> > > > > > prior to the formation of the TC.  I want to make it
> > clear that
> > > > > > Microsoft never would have suggested that the charter
> > could be
> > > > > > changed since this is known to be against OASIS rules.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2. >Paul: I'm going to vote against this. It will
> > > divert the TCs
> > > > > > resources into a non-normative, non-exhaustive doc who's
> > > > > > applicability to the work of the TC is unclear.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please replace this with what I put into the Chat
> > dialogue and
> > > > > > which I read out:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >Paul: I am going to vote against this proposal since it
> > > > > > recommends the
> > > > > > TC work on a non-normative, undecided scope, non-exhaustive
> > > > > > non-deliverable.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 3. >Paul: I won't disagree with you. I take it you are
> > > referring
> > > > > > to XQuery? That effort started with a blank slate. This
> > > TC started
> > > > > > with completed specs as well as interop scenarios. I
> > think this
> > > > > > effort is beyond the need for use cases.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please replace this with the following (I never used the
> word
> > > > > > "completed"):
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Paul: I won't disagree with you. I take it you are
> > referring to
> > > > > > XQuery? That effort started with a blank slate. This
> > TC started
> > > > > > with well-defined contributed specs as well as interop
> > > scenarios.
> > > > > > I think this effort is beyond the need for use cases.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 4. >Paul: That would be the URI for the RDL document?
> > > (yes). The
> > > > > > RDL document would point you at the schema file?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Change "RDL" to "RDDL" everywhere it occurs.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > /paulc
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
> > > > > > 17 Eleanor Drive, Nepean, Ontario K2E 6A3
> > > > > > Tel: (613) 225-5445 Fax: (425) 936-7329
> > > > > > mailto:pcotton@microsoft.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From: Gilbert Pilz [mailto:Gilbert.Pilz@bea.com]
> > > > > > > Sent: August 18, 2005 8:40 PM
> > > > > > > To: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > > > > > Subject: [ws-rx] Draft teleconf minutes for 18 August 2005
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Attached is the draft of the minutes. Please notify if you
> > > > > > feel there
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > anything missing or incorrect and I'll fix it before I
> > > > > upload this
> > > > > > > document (probably on Monday). I'm sorry for the parts
> that
> > > > > > simply say
> > > > > > > (back and forth) but when everyone talks at once it is
> > > > > very hard to
> > > > > > > catch what is being said.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - g
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >