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

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ws-rx message

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


Subject: RE: [ws-rx] v1.2CD01 ready for review


Thanks Mary for the clarification.

 

I assume that this means that a reference to a target specification should reflect the current status of the target specification, such as ‘Editors Draft’ or ‘Working Draft’. This makes the recent changes to the SX references in the RX specifications correct and consistent with this principle.

 

> Committee Specification – Committee Specification ballots are conducted electronically by the TC Administrator. Should a TC wish to identify Designated Cross-references, the chair or secretary will so indicate in their request to TC Admin, along with the other requisite information (comment resolution log, meeting minutes, links to the documents). The TC Admin would then verify that each specification identified as a Designated Cross-reference is either pending in my queue (I have received notification and am in the process of validating the request) or a ballot is currently underway. The results of the ballot will not be announced until any other ballots for specifications identified as a Designated Cross-reference have completed. Once all ballots have completed, the TC will be notified as to which cross-references can be updated. The date of approval will be the date the last related ballot closed.

 

Am I correct in interpreting that the RX specifications can now proceed without delay up to Committee Specification ballot and then the RX specifications would need to wait until the SX specifications are approved as a Committee Specification?

  

From: Mary McRae [mailto:marypmcrae@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Mary McRae
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 4:49 PM
To: 'Doug Davis'; Ram Jeyaraman
Cc: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [ws-rx] v1.2CD01 ready for review

 

Hi Doug and Ram,

 

   Not quite as you stated … both specs must be “in progress”. Here’s the rule and how I’ve notified the board that I will implement it. Note that the board could come back and tell me to do something different, but having been in all the meetings I believe this meets the intent. This rule goes into effect 1 March 2008.

 

Cross-references:

“Designated Cross-reference Changes

A TC wishing to update the Normative References or Non-Normative References in one of its OASIS specifications to reflect the outcome of a pending status change in another OASIS specification may do so, by adopting a "Designated Cross-reference Change" as part of its Specification Approval Motion, which must include:  (a) a list designating each of the other OASIS specifications (including version number) that are referenced by that Specification and whose cross-references should conditionally be updated;  (b) a reference to this Section 2.18; and  (c) an acknowledgement that approval and publication of the specification may be delayed by the Designated Cross-reference Changes.

 

“The text of a proposed Designated Cross-reference Change to a specification must include and may only include:  the name, version and revision number;  expected approval status; date;  and URI for each other specification to be cross-referenced. The effectiveness of a proposed Designated Cross-reference Change in a specification is conditioned on the resolution of the expected approval action for each cross-referenced specification.  Therefore, if a Specification Approval Motion includes proposed Designated Cross-reference Changes, the effectiveness of the subject specification's approval will be delayed until the resolution of all other cross-referenced specification approval actions.  The TC Administrator will withhold announcement and certification of the specification itself until all such cross-referenced resolutions are complete.

 

“If the Specification Approval Motion (which includes Designated Cross-reference Changes) passes, then, when the last cross-referenced approval is resolved, the final approved version will be published with all of its conditional descriptions of the cross-referenced specifications updated to reflect their correct status at that time.”

 

 

My recommendation for implementation is as follows:

Committee Draft – I have no direct involvement in balloting/approval of Committee Draft status. Until we have a mechanism in place that allows us to validate Committee Drafts (such as the OASIS Library) there will be no checks/balances in place. If asked to upload the CD to the OASIS Library I will perform the requisite checks.

 

Public Review Draft – the current practice calls for the chair or secretary to send a request to TC Admin to start a public review. That request must include links to the documents to be published, links to meeting minutes containing the approval motion, and a list of public mailing lists that should be notified of the review. If such motion contains designated cross-references, they will be QC’d along with the other aspects of the document that are checked before announcing the review to membership.

 

Committee Specification – Committee Specification ballots are conducted electronically by the TC Administrator. Should a TC wish to identify Designated Cross-references, the chair or secretary will so indicate in their request to TC Admin, along with the other requisite information (comment resolution log, meeting minutes, links to the documents). The TC Admin would then verify that each specification identified as a Designated Cross-reference is either pending in my queue (I have received notification and am in the process of validating the request) or a ballot is currently underway. The results of the ballot will not be announced until any other ballots for specifications identified as a Designated Cross-reference have completed. Once all ballots have completed, the TC will be notified as to which cross-references can be updated. The date of approval will be the date the last related ballot closed.

 

OASIS Standard – there are two pieces to an OASIS Standard vote. The first is a motion by the TC for the TC Admin to start a ballot to approve the submission of the specification to the OASIS membership. It is that motion that will need to identify any Designated Cross-references, along with the existing requirements. Similar to a CS ballot, the OASIS Standard ballot results will not be announced until any other ballots for specifications identified as a Designated Cross-reference have completed. At that time the TC will be notified as to which cross-references can be updated. The date of approval will be the date the last related ballot closed.

 

Regards,

 

Mary

 

From: Doug Davis [mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 7:15 PM
To: marypmcrae@gmail.com
Subject: Fw: [ws-rx] v1.2CD01 ready for review

 


Care to comment on this?  Does the new process change allow us to reference a spec as an OS before it really is?

thanks
-Doug
______________________________________________________
STSM  |  Web Services Architect  |  IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905  |  IBM T/L 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com

----- Forwarded by Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM on 02/27/2008 07:13 PM -----

Ram Jeyaraman <Ram.Jeyaraman@microsoft.com>

02/27/2008 06:52 PM

To

"ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org" <ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org>

cc

Subject

RE: [ws-rx] v1.2CD01 ready for review

 




During the previous RX TC call, there was mention of upcoming changes to the OASIS Process Rules (effective March 01) that would allow the RX TC to submit their specifications for Public Review and OASIS vote without waiting for the SX specifications. If the RX TC were to proceed based on the new OASIS process rules, should not the RX spec references to WS-SX specifications be called “OASIS Standard” instead of “Editors draft”?
 
That is, for example,
 
[SecureConversation] OASIS WS-SX Technical Committee Editor Draft, "WS-271 SecureConversation 1.4" 272 http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-sx/ws-secureconversation/200512
 
should instead be:
 
[SecureConversation] OASIS Standard, "WS-SecureConversation 1.4" http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-sx/ws-secureconversation/200512.
 
Similar changes follow for WS-Trust and WS-SecurityPolicy references as well.
 
I suggest that we avoid editing the RX specifications every time the SX ones change status by using the project reference text.
 
Thanks.
 
From: Doug Davis [mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
Sent:
Tuesday, February 26, 2008 9:39 AM
To:
ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject:
Re: [ws-rx] v1.2CD01 ready for review

 

All,

 we've had a ruling from Mary on this and the SX specs are now referred to as "Editor Draft"s w/o any date at all.  The "Latest..." hrefs are now updated.


WSRM: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/27348/wsrm-1.2-spec-cd-01.pdf

WSRMP: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/27346/wsrmp-1.2-spec-cd-01.pdf

WSMC: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/27347/wsmc-1.1-spec-cd-01.pdf


ZIP FILE: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/27345/WSRX%20v1.2-CD01.zip


Sorry for any confusion.


thanks
-Doug
______________________________________________________
STSM  |  Web Services Architect  |  IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905  |  IBM T/L 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com

Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS

02/26/2008 08:50 AM

 

To

ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org

cc

Subject

[ws-rx] v1.2CD01 ready for review


 

 






All,

v1.2 CD01 is ready for review.  Under the "Latest ..." hrefs [1] you'll find the pdf version of the files.  The zip file [2] contains everything, including the *-diff.pdf versions if you want to see the change bars.  Things to look for:

- both sets of footers are correct (spec name and date)  - "both" meaning there are two types of footers in the doc  (2nd set starts after page 3)

- title page has the correct version number, name, date and hrefs
- removal of policy 1.2 refs in the normative refs section
- upate of sx (SecPolicy and Trust) refs in the normative refs section
- update of RM refs in the normative refs section

There is still an open question, for Mary, as to whether or not we need to have the SX dates in the references since those may change.


[1]

Latest RM: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/27334/wsrm-1.2-spec-cd-01.pdf

Latest RMP: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/27332/wsrmp-1.2-spec-cd-01.pdf

Latest MC: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/27333/wsmc-1.1-spec-cd-01.pdf


[2]

Latest Zip: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/27331/WSRX%20v1.2-CD01.zip


thanks
-Doug
______________________________________________________
STSM  |  Web Services Architect  |  IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905  |  IBM T/L 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com



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