Future plans (if any) of the XSLT Conformance TC

[david_marston@us.ibm.com]

The current voting members of the XSLT Conformance TC think that we are 
not likely to get an increase in participation, especially when the new 
IPR rules come into effect. All contributed test cases, and feedback as 
well if I am reading it correctly, will need to be accompanied by a clear 
grant of rights to OASIS. I think some of the likely sources of test cases 
may not have obtained suitably clear rights from their contributors. 
Without new blood, we have to be realistic about what we can do, both for 
XSLT 1.0 and 2.0, so we drafted a set of scenarios for a potential formal 
vote.

The scenarios actually broke down into two votes, one about short-term 
activity and one about the longer-range future. Outside concerns 
influenced both time frames. For the short term, we (possibly being 
biased) noted that Apache is the site of visible activity to expand and 
improve the 1.0 collection. I don't know of any other collection that is 
non-proprietary and being maintained like Apache. For the longer term, the 
XSL WG at the W3C needs to have test cases but has not discussed their 
views on maintenance and cultivation of 2.0 test cases. The issues are 
presented below with a contingency about the latter. As for Apache, you 
may wish to send in a comment about whether Apache is 
better/worse/equivalent for your purposes as a home for a maintained test 
suite.

The non-voting observers on this list should look at the issues below and 
take it as a notice of the set of options we think are in our control. If 
these options spur you to take action, please reply.

This is not a Call for Voting. That is done through a different feature in 
Kavi and will happen soon.

QUESTION 1. What should the TC do before the new IPR rules go into effect 
on April 15?
A. Take no further action on the 1.0 suite, leaving it published as a 
draft, properly cataloged with respect to the cases, but not flagged for 
questionable cases or discretionary items.
B. Fix up the 1.0 suite as best we can, and issue it, leaving open the 
possibility of some maintenance in the future if 2B is chosen.
C. Move to issue the 1.0 suite in final as-is form, announcing that there 
will be no maintenance.

QUESTION 2. What should the TC do about continuing?
A. Do whatever is voted under Question 1, then terminate. (i.e., Don't try 
to assemble a 2.0 suite.)
B. Do whatever is voted under Question 1, then seek out an indication from 
the XSL WG of what role they expect of us, then decide a course of action 
when we hear from them.

This will be discussed at our March 10 teleconference.
.................David Marston