[xcbf] [Fwd: asn1dev [Fwd: Documents for OASIS (new Class A liaison toSC6)]]

[John Larmouth <j.larmouth@salford.ac.uk>]

FYI.

John L

-- 
   Prof John Larmouth
   Larmouth T&PDS Ltd
   (Training and Protocol Development Services)
   1 Blueberry Road                     
   Bowdon                               j.larmouth@salford.ac.uk
   Cheshire WA14 3LS                    Tel: +44 161 928 1605
   England				Fax: +44 161 928 8069

--- Begin Message ---

• From: Thierry.Perewostchikow@itu.int
• To: sebek@itu.int
• Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 23:42:11 +0200

Georges,

To reply to your question, ITU-T Recommendation A.4 states that :
Art. 2: "The communication process permits document exchange between ITU-T
and qualified forums/consortia".
Art. 2.2.1	Documents sent to A.4-qualified forums/consortia
"A proposal to send documentation (referred to as "communication statement",
including requests for documentation) to an A.4-qualified forum/consortium
can arise from work by a rapporteur group, working party or study group. The
decision to send such information is made by the study group chairman in
consultation with the relevant working party chairman, and, if arising from
a study group meeting, with the agreement of the study group. The
documentation is sent to the forum/consortium by TSB on behalf of the study
group".

In my understanding, A.4 Recommendation states that any information or
documentation requires SG Chairman's authorization before being sent to the
A.4-qualified forum/consortium.  It is a voluntary and selective process,
under SG Chairman control.

I then share your view that documents should be sent for consideration only
if appropriate.  Article 2.2.1 designating the person judging if
appropriate.

This constitutes a reply from the theoretical point of view, I am
unfortunately not in a position to precisely assess all the implications in
the current case. 

I remain at your disposal for any further comment if needed.

Regards,

Thierry




-----Original Message-----
From: Sebek, Boguslaw Georges 
Sent: vendredi, 16. août 2002 16:06
To: Perewostchikow, Thierry
Cc: Larmouth John (E-mail); Tanaka, Saburo; 'hbertine@lucent.com'
Subject: FW: asn1dev [Fwd: Documents for OASIS (new Class A liaison to
SC6)]


Thierry,

could you please clarify if the A.4 recognition allows an organization
(OASIS, in our case) to have access to all ITU-T working documents, on only
authorizes a Study Group/Working Party/Rapporteur to liaise with by sending
documents for consideration when appropriate (and vice-versa). My
understanding is the latter.

As far as Phil, as individual, is concerned, he has access to all SG 17
documentation as he was registered in the past under the ISO umbrella.

Herb,

I am not familiar with the category A liaison in the ISO context, but I
understand that there may be a problem in the situation described here re.
collaborative work with ISO/IEC JTC 1.

Georges 

-----Original Message-----
From: John Larmouth [mailto:j.larmouth@salford.ac.uk]
Sent: vendredi, 16. août 2002 14:54
To: asn1dev@oss.com
Cc: SEBEK Georges
Subject: Re: asn1dev [Fwd: Documents for OASIS (new Class A liaison to
SC6)]


If ITU-T considers that OASIS, despite their A4 liaison, should not get
the documents, then ITU-T can certainly approach ISO and say that, as
the work is collaborative, and as ITU-T does not wish OASIS to get the
docs, would ISO please agree that the class A liaison rules do not hold,
and that ISO should NOT distribute the documents to OASIS.

As far as I am concerned, this should be settled at a level at which I
personally am not involved.  But before any hasty action is taken, Herb
should be consulted.

John L




> DUBUISSON Olivier wrote:
> 
> John Larmouth wrote:
> >
> > So now you will have everything that is official output from
> Rapporteur
> > meetings.
> 
> I am opposed to this. So is my company and France as a Member State
> of ITU-T (for Rick and Amardeo's knowledge, I've replaced Daniel
> Vincent as head of the French SG17 delegation).
> 
> ----
> (With my Rapporteur hat on)
> 
> As far as ITU-T goes, this cannot be decided without the Rapporteur
> being part of the decision (at least).
> An A.4 liaison doesn't give rights to have non-restricted access to
> not-yet-approved documents.
> 
> This is definitely time to disjoint the work. I am bored to be
> bypassed by everybody in the group, particularly by the other
> Rapporteur who keeps doing what he wants.
> 
> Such decision should not be sent to 2 mailing-lists without the
> agreement of the other Rapporteur.
> 
> Bancroft, please remove me from asn1dev. I do not consider this
> list as official as far as ITU-T goes. We have the Q.12/17 reflector
> which it is time to use.
> 
> asn1dev has now turned into an AT+JL list with no attempt whatsoever
> to make sure that everybody is following and agreeing.
> 
> OD

-- 
   Prof John Larmouth
   Larmouth T&PDS Ltd
   (Training and Protocol Development Services)
   1 Blueberry Road                     
   Bowdon                               j.larmouth@salford.ac.uk
   Cheshire WA14 3LS                    Tel: +44 161 928 1605
   England				Fax: +44 161 928 8069

--- End Message ---