Re: [ws-sx] Groups - WS-SecurityPolicy Examples Version 1.0 CS02(docs.oasis-open.org/ws-sx/security-policy/examples/ws-sp-usecases-examples-cs-02.html)uploaded

["Rich.Levinson" <rich.levinson@oracle.com>]

Hi Tony, Kelvin, and Mary,

IMO, the process has been properly followed. I have tried to explain this in
previous emails, which I will cite again, and see if I can summarize the 
situation.

In particular, in the following email:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-sx/201010/msg00025.html

I suggested that people cast their votes on the open ballot, based on my
interpretation of the process, and I included a time line of events that 
I believe
explain why the ballot was voted to be launched on Jun 9. Also, in that 
email
is a "+1" from Mary confirming that the time line of events was accurate.
I am including that time line below and have numbered the items 1->16 for
reference purposes.

For context, there have been 3 ballots for ws-sx examples, and I will 
trace the process for
each below, which should show that the 3rd ballot just voted on was 
approved by
the 9-Jun-10 TC meeting, and that after this vote the process was followed
and that the ballot was initiated properly and voted on.

I believe the process followed was exactly the same as that followed in
the previous 2nd ballot, which unfortunately did not pass only because
not everyone was aware the ballot was open.

The first ballot did pass, which produced CS-01 on 24-Nov-09.

The 2nd and 3rd ballots have been attempts to approve some changes to
the list of acknowledgements plus some TC-Admin requested format
changes, which have been intended to move the doc to CS-02.

First, in terms of ballots, there have been 3 ballots for WS-SX examples
(which can be seen on the TC-Members page under the "Ballots" tab):
Ballot Name 
</apps/org/workgroup/ws-sx/ballots.php?sort_field=ballot.name&sort_type=ASC> 
	Close Date </apps/org/workgroup/ws-sx/ballots.php?sort_type=ASC> 	Status
Approve WS-Security Policy Examples as a Committee Specification (3rd 
ballot: passed CS-02)
</apps/org/workgroup/ws-sx/ballot.php?id=1962>
	
2010-11-03
	
Closed
Approve WS-Security Policy Examples as a Committee Specification (2nd 
ballot: failed)
</apps/org/workgroup/ws-sx/ballot.php?id=1868>
	
2010-05-07
	
Closed
Approve WS-Security Policy Examples as a Committee Specification (1st 
ballot: passed CS-01)
</apps/org/workgroup/ws-sx/ballot.php?id=1799>
	
2009-11-23
	
Closed



The vote to initiate the first ballot (dated 2009-11-23 above) was 
recorded in the 30-Sep-09 TC minutes:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-sx/200910/msg00001.html
The first ballot was passed on 23-Nov-09, and the the doc was updated by 
tc-admin to CS-01,
and is located here:
http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-sx/security-policy/examples/ws-sp-usecases-examples-cs-01.html

Sequence of events for 2nd ballot:

    * The first attempt to go to CS-02, was voted on in the Feb 3, 2010
      TC meeting, item #2 below.
    * The ballot was not initiated because TC-Admin requested changes on
      Feb 17, 2010, item #3 below.
    * The requested changes by TC-Admin were submitted on Apr 1, 2010,
      item #5 below.
    * TC-Admin then launched the ballot on Apr 30, 2010, closed on May
      7, 2010,
      with insufficient votes, item #6 below. Mary also indicated we
      could restart the ballot
      if we wanted, since it only failed because not all members who
      wanted to vote had
      been aware of the open ballot.

However, instead of restarting the ballot, the TC decided to make some 
changes including
the removal of the section on RFC2119, plus some minor edits to remove 
any RFC2119
formatting in the doc. The doc was then updated with the minor edits and 
RFC2119 removed,
and submitted for committee review on May 12, 2009, item #9 below.

The sequence for the 3rd ballot then began:

    * The second attempt to go to CS-02 was voted on in the Jun 9, 2010
      TC meeting,
      item #10 below and the doc resubmitted based on that vote: item #11.
    * The ballot was not initiated because TC-Admin had some requested
      changes,
      including restoral of the RFC2119 section as detailed in Jul 12,
      2010 email from
      TC-Admin, item #12 below.
    * The changes requested by TC-Admin were discussed at the Sep 15,
      2010, where
      it was decided to get further clarification from TC-Admin, as to
      whether RFC2119
      section should be restored, item #14 below:
          o TC-Admin was contacted, and reconfirmed that the section
            needed to be
            restored
          o Restoring the section on RFC2119 was further discussed at
            the Oct 13, 2010
            TC meeting, item #15 below, and it was decided to restore
            the section which
            was done and the updated doc re-submitted after that
            meeting, item #16 below.
          o Note: there was some discussion that we might need to vote
            again at the next
            meeting, but it turned out this was unnecessary because
            updating the doc
            with just template corrections based on TC-Admin comments
            does not
            require a revote, which is exactly what happened in the 2nd
            ballot as well,
            as described in the previous set of bullets. However, it was
            not known at
            the meeting that it was unnecessary to vote again, so simply
            resubmitting
            the document w the TC-Admin requested changes was
            sufficient, that based
            on TC-Admin approval of the changes that the ballot could be
            launched
            based on the vote of the Jun 9, 2010 meeting.
    * The ballot was started and received the necessary votes to approve
      CS-02.

IMO, the confusion that has been discussed was because it was not well 
understood
that when a vote for a ballot is approved on a document by the TC, that 
TC-Admin
then reviews the document and can recommend changes. If those changes are
simply formatting and template related issues, then the TC does not 
necessarily
have to vote again, presumably since it was not the TC that requested 
the changes,
and that if TC-Admin is satisfied with the changes then there is no need 
for the
TC to approve the changes requested by TC-Admin.

Probably way too much detail for most to plow thru, however, IMO, this 
ballot
was launched based on the Jun 9, 2010 vote, was delayed due to changes 
requested
by TC-Admin on Jul 12, 2010, those changes were approved by TC and submitted
on Oct 13, 2010, which effectively resulted in the "automatic" launching 
of the
delayed ballot.

    Finally, there also was talk on Oct 13 TC mtg of another vote, but I
    believe
    that was based on the erroneous belief that it was necessary to vote
    again
    after making the TC-Admin requested changes, which satisfied the
    requirements
    of the latent voted request for ballot from Jun 9. This is why I
    suggested that
    people vote on the outstanding ballot, because I assumed the ballot had
    been properly launched, and rather than have another failed ballot
    due to
    lack of votes, that we could "fix it later" if necessary, which,
    imo, is not
    necessary, but presumably the TC as a whole can decide that.


Thanks,
Rich



*******************************************************************
Timeline of events on Examples doc since cs-01:
*******************************************************************
#1: 2/1/10:
original update (wd-21) of acknowledgements approved by TC to request 
ballot,
but was based from cd-01, not cs-01:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-sx/201002/msg00001.html

#2: 2/3/10:
tc votes to approve cd-02, and to start ballot for cs-02:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-sx/201002/msg00013.html

#3: 2/17/10:
mary request to do updates based on cs-01:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-sx/201002/msg00018.html

#4: 3/30/10:
same mods as 2/1, voted on at 2/3 meeting, but using cs-01 as baseline:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-sx/201003/msg00007.html

#5: 4/1/10:
same mods as 2/1/10, which was voted on at 2/3/10 mtg, but using cs-01
as baseline and submitting as wd-22:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-sx/201004/msg00000.html

#6: 5/8/10:
mary sends notice that ballot received insufficient votes to pass, but that
if members failed to vote then we could resubmit:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-sx/201005/msg00001.html

#7: 5/12/10:
candidate doc submitted to tc to consider resubmitting:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-sx/201005/msg00006.html

#8: 5/12/10: tc mtg discusses missed ballot where a number of yes votes 
were
simply unaware ballot was open; however, rather than resubmit as is
tc decides to remove rfc2119 refs:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-sx/201005/msg00010.html

#9: 5/12/10:
candidate doc submitted to tc for approval as cd-03 w rfc2119 removed:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-sx/201005/msg00011.html

#10: 6/9/10:
tc votes the 5/12 doc to cd-03 to be submitted for tc-admin ballot:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-sx/201006/msg00010.html

#11: 6/9/10:
candidate doc, cd-03, for tc-admin ballot:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-sx/201006/msg00009.html

#12: 7/12/10:
tc-admin requests changes incl restoral of rfc2119 before approving ballot:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-sx/201007/msg00005.html

#13: 8/10/10:
reply to query on status: delays have been incurred, but changes in 
progress:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-sx/201008/maillist.html

#14: 9/15/10:
tc mtg: requests clarification on rfc2119 from tc-admin, but other requested
chgs to proceed:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-sx/201009/msg00007.html

#15: 10/13/10:
tc mtg: decides to restore rfc2119, and resubmit doc:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-sx/201010/msg00003.html

#16: 10/13/10:
doc submitted as cd-04 w all reqd tc-admin chgs:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-sx/201010/msg00002.html

*******************************************************************


Anthony Nadalin wrote:
>
> I don’t believe that you received a request by the chair create the 
> vote, so we are back to procedure.
>
> *From:* Mary McRae [mailto:mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 17, 2010 3:27 PM
> *To:* Kelvin Lawrence
> *Cc:* Anthony Nadalin; ws-sx@lists.oasis-open.org
> *Subject:* Re: [ws-sx] Groups - WS-SecurityPolicy Examples Version 1.0 
> CS02 
> (docs.oasis-open.org/ws-sx/security-policy/examples/ws-sp-usecases-examples-cs-02.html) 
> uploaded
>
> Hi Kelvin,
>
> With all due respect to Tony, I received no request from a Chair to 
> withdraw the ballot; the ballot passed by the required 2/3 majority 
> and the CS document was created. Any member may appeal the decision of 
> the TC and/or the TC Administrator but I have not seen anything so at 
> this point, at least, the CS stands.
>
> Best regards and welcome back!
>
> Mary
>
>
>
> On Nov 17, 2010, at 6:14 PM, Kelvin Lawrence wrote:
>
>
>
> I have been out of the country most of the last 8 days. Can someone 
> please update me as to where we eneded up ion this issue? Do Chris and 
> I have actions?
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
>
> Cheers
> Kelvin
>
> -----Anthony Nadalin <tonynad@microsoft.com 
> <mailto:tonynad@microsoft.com>> wrote: -----
>
> To: "mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org <mailto:mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org>" 
> <mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org <mailto:mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org>>
> From: Anthony Nadalin <tonynad@microsoft.com 
> <mailto:tonynad@microsoft.com>>
> Date: 11/04/2010 01:39PM
> Cc: "ws-sx@lists.oasis-open.org <mailto:ws-sx@lists.oasis-open.org>" 
> <ws-sx@lists.oasis-open.org <mailto:ws-sx@lists.oasis-open.org>>
> Subject: Re: [ws-sx] Groups - WS-SecurityPolicy Examples Version 1.0 
> CS02 
> (docs.oasis-open.org/ws-sx/security-policy/examples/ws-sp-usecases-examples-cs-02.html 
> <http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-sx/security-policy/examples/ws-sp-usecases-examples-cs-02.html>) 
> uploaded
>
> I believe this vote was not held within the process the TC agreed to 
> as documented in the minutes.
>
>
>
> On Nov 4, 2010, at 11:34 AM, "mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org 
> <mailto:mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org>" <mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org 
> <mailto:mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org>> wrote:
>
> > The ballot to approve WS-SecurityPolicy Examples Version 1.0 as a 
> Committee
> > Specification has passed. The updated files are now available online:
> >
> > http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-sx/security-policy/examples/ws-sp-usecases-examples-cs-02.doc
> >
> > http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-sx/security-policy/examples/ws-sp-usecases-examples-cs-02.pdf
> > http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-sx/security-policy/examples/ws-sp-usecases-examples-cs-02.html
> >
> > Mary P McRae
> > Director, Standards Development
> > Technical Committee Administrator
> >
> >
> > -- Mary McRae
> >
> > The document named WS-SecurityPolicy Examples Version 1.0 CS02
> > (docs.oasis-open.org/ws-sx/security-policy/examples/ws-sp-usecases-examples-cs-02.html 
> <http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-sx/security-policy/examples/ws-sp-usecases-examples-cs-02.html>)
> > has been submitted by Mary McRae to the OASIS Web Services Secure 
> Exchange
> > (WS-SX) TC document repository.
> >
> > Document Description:
> > This document is a link to 
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-sx/security-policy/examples/ws-sp-usecases-examples-cs-02.html
> >
> >
> > View Document Details:
> > http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=40127
> >
> > Download Document:
> > http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/40127/docs.oasis-open.orgws-sxsecurity-policyexamplesws-sp-usecases-examples-cs-02.html
> >
> >
> > PLEASE NOTE: If the above links do not work for you, your email 
> application
> > may be breaking the link into two pieces. You may be able to copy and 
> paste
> > the entire link address into the address field of your web browser.
> >
> > -OASIS Open Administration
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>