Meeting Minutes 16th November 2012. Approved 30th November 2012.
Roll: Martin, Patrick, Zhexuan, Jacques, Chet
- Regrets: Robin
Agenda: approved as posted
2nd November: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/tab/email/archives/201211/msg00002.html Approved w/o Agreed to post to wiki
- ACTION 20120726-1: already marked as done at previous meeting. Agenda cut and paste error. ACTION-20121026-0: Done
Multi-part Work Products: Wait for Robin
Action to Board Process SC done: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/tab/email/archives/201211/msg00015.html plus a counter proposal: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/tab/email/archives/201211/msg00016.html Zhexuan gave an update from yesterday's Board Meeting, if there are optional steps at the end why have them at all? Discussion of counter proposal Jacques: a bit strange to have two types of committee notes Martin: short docs need to be processed quickly, meatier documents require more rigour/branding. Patrick: short informative docs with a different brand can indicate differ levels of rigour Jacques: maybe we need three type of docs: specs, notes, and communications. Martin: might not need three types - if simple docs go through a simple process, and complex docs go through spec track. Jacques (Fujitsu): I am sympathetic to broadening the notion of CS - it seems that ISO has such a broad view for standards? Jacques (Fujitsu): there is the conf clause requirement though Martin: conformance can always be "there is none" Is this just a branding issue? downplay committee note branding e.g make it very clear that is tc only and not had any oasis peer review An official oasis deliverable needs to go through more rigour and better branding
Chet will revise https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/tab/email/archives/201211/msg00016.html based on the conversation and email to the tab. Based on feedback will submit to the board on behalf of TC admin and TAB. Should be done in time for the next Board Process SC on the 29th Nov. ACTION-20121116-0: Chet to revise CN branding proposal and circulate to TAB for comment with the intent to submit to Board Process SC meeting on 29th Nov.
Draft at: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/tab/email/archives/201211/msg00000.html What to do about ISO Keywords? last email in thread: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/tab/email/archives/201211/msg00014.html
- Chet to follow up with Jamie, since Jamie was not actually copies on the last email!
- ACTION-20121116-1: Chet to follow up with Jamie wrt request to ISO on use of keyword text. Martin will add appendices with master text for RFC2119 and ISO language that will be used in templates. Jacques: the test assertion guideline TC used ISO keywords. Jacques: what about guidance on mapping between rfc2119 and iso? Martin: this should be a simple rule document, and guidelines on how to map can go in the to be updated conformance guidelines
Summary of New and Outstanding Issues:
- ACTION-20121012-0: Robin to propose how the manifest digest will be used/verified ACTION-20121012-1: Robin to draft an update on the naming directives to reflect multi part filenames and uris designs. ACTION-20121116-0: Chet to revise CN branding proposal and circulate to TAB for comment with the intent to submit to Board Process SC meeting on 29th Nov. ACTION-20121116-1: Chet to follow up with Jamie wrt request to ISO on use of keyword text.