Subject: Draft minutes TAB meeting April 8, 2016

=============================================================

Minutes TAB call (April 8, 2016)

=============================================================

Info

Time: 2pmET

Dial:

Host confcall: OASIS

US Toll Free: +1 641 715-3822

Chat room: http://webconf.soaphub.org/conf/room/tab

Agenda

1) Roll call

2) Approval of agenda

3) Approval of minutes

4) Status of public reviews

5) Status of open action items

6) Discussion of conformance clauses for non-machine processable specifications

7) AOB

Minutes

1) Roll call

Attending: Ashok, Chet, Jacques, Kevin, Patrick

2) Approval of agenda

No discussion of agenda. No objections to unanimous approval. Agenda approved.

3) Approval of minutes Draft minutes

March 11: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/tab/email/archives/201603/msg00062.html

No discussion of minutes. No objections to unanimous approval. Minutes approved.

4) Status of public reviews New public reviews:

- Business Document Naming and Design Rules Version 1.0, ends May 5th (https://www.oasis-open.org/news/announcements/public-review-for-business-document-naming-and-design-rules-v1-0-from-the-ubl-tc-)

- UBL Naming and Design Rules Version 3.0, ends May 5th (https://www.oasis-open.org/news/announcements/30-day-public-review-for-ubl-naming-and-design-rules-v3-0-from-ubl-tc-ends-may-5t)

These were originally "UBL Naming and Design Rules" but the TC choose to split out the normative content into a new work product. Have probably been reviewed before.

Upcoming reviews: - Business Document Envelope (BDE) 1.1 CSPRD01 - expect to launch next week

5) Status of open action items

* Chet - contact Carol Geyer about adding citation lists to Policies & Guidelines page. Still open.

* Chet - prepare an editorial copy of section 5 of conformance clause document and send to TAB to review - see https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/tab/email/archives/201603/msg00085.html Done. Closed.

* TAB - review proposed edits and new text of conformance clause document Ongoing.

6) Discussion of conformance clauses for non-machine processable specifications Discussed Jacques draft copy sent to the TC with https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/tab/201604/msg00006.html

Discussed draft definition of 'implementation.' Definition of the term is important because conformance clauses are written in reference to 'implementations.'

A broad definition is difficult because software is one type, but we also talked about whether a document could be a conforming implementation, or a business process.

No conclusions or consensus reached. Agreement that we will work on that definition by email before the next meeting.

7) AOB No other business raised.

Next meeting is scheduled for Friday, April 22nd at 2:00 EDT.

Minutes respectfully submitted on 11 April 2016 by Chet Ensign.

Chat log

Chet: Attending: Ashok, Jacques, Patrick, Chet
Chet: Kevin joining late
Chet: 2) Agenda - no disc, no obj - approved
Chet: 3) Minutes - no disc, no obj - approved
Chet: 4) public reviews Chet: Business Document Envelope (BDE) will start next week
Chet: Jacques - has been approached by members of the OSLC PROMCODE TC
Chet: https://www.oasis-open.org/resources/tc-admin-requests/request-tab-pre-review-comments
Chet: 5) open action items
Chet: * Chet - contact Carol Geyer about adding citation lists to Policies & Guidelines page.
Still not done
Chet: Chet - prepare an editorial copy of section 5 of conformance clause document and send to TAB to review
- see https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/tab/email/archives/201603/msg00085.html
Chet: Done - closed
Chet: * TAB - review proposed edits and new text of conformance clause document
Chet: Ongoing
Chet: 6) conformance clause discussion
Chet: reviewing Jacque's draft
Chet: Kevin joins
Chet: Discussion of the definition of implementation
Chet: I see you Patrick.
Chet: "implementations are things that operate on byte strings and produce some defined result"
Patrick: btye string -> byte streams
Patrick: specification defines inputs and required outputs from an implementation
Patrick: an implementation accepts defined input and produces required output
Patrick: an implementation is any means or method of accepting defined input and producing defined output
Chet: J: this is *one* type of implementation - a processor - but it is unnecessarily restrictive a definition
0 Patrick: "any means or method" is too restrictive?
Chet: J: e.g. a spec that simply defines a document format
Patrick: Ah, you mean like DocBook?
Chet: J: it is a spec author / TC decision
Chet: J: conformance is about implementation
Patrick: are we overloading implementation? - processor, processing, document?
Chet: J: conformance makes no sense without implementation
Chet: K: the processor doesn't have to be part of the implementation - e.g. typing and ODF document in notepad
Chet: K: so an ODF document is an implementation of the specification
Chet: K: and if a word processor can produce an ODF document, it can also be an implementation
Patrick: hmmm, so why use "implementation" for both documents and processors?
Chet: A: maybe we need another word besides implementation
Chet: A: so a document must conform - but it isn't an 'implementation' - otherwise the word 'implementation' is forced to cover an overly broad area
Patrick: What is the pay-off by using implementation so broadly?
Kevin Mangold (NIST): is it a software implementation? no, not really... but the document implements rules set out in the data format spec
Chet: Chet: how about something like this:
Chet: An implementation is any artifact that meets, in part or in whole, the normative statements of a specification.
Chet: ... meets, in whole or in part, the requirements of the normative statements...
Kevin Mangold (NIST): "In computer science, an implementation is a realization of a technical specification or algorithm as a program, software component, or other computer system through computer programming and deployment." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implementation#Computer_science)
Kevin Mangold (NIST): "Implementation is the realization of an application, or execution of a plan, idea, model, design, specification, standard, algorithm, or policy." (same url as before)
Chet: J: 'artifact' means - could it cover e.g. a business process?
Chet: J: need to be sure that the definition will cover also things like business processes / frameworks
Chet: So let's focus on getting this definition right by email before the next meeting.
Sent transcript to: chet.ensign@comcast.net
Sent transcript to: chet.ensign@oasis-open.org

20160408 (last edited 2016-04-11 18:07:13 by chet.ensign)