Subject: Draft minutes TAB meeting 07 April 2017 with action items

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

Minutes TAB call (April 07, 2017)

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

Info

Time: 3pmET

Dial:

Host confcall: OASIS

US Toll Free: +1 641 715-3822

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

Action items assigned in meeting

- Chet: write up blurbs for Open Stnds Cup nominees and send to TAB

- Chet: make final edits to conformance clause draft, convert to HTML, and load to the library.

- Ashok: check for material at the W3C that could help us with an editors handbook

- Chet: check terms of use for Google Docs. Proceed w/ starting the outline of an editor's handbook as a Google Doc

Agenda

1) Roll call

2) Approval of agenda

3) Approval of minutes March 24th

4) Status of public reviews

5) Status of open action items

6) Open Standards Cup nominees

7) Board Process Committee response to nimble review proposal

8 ) Approval of latest Guidelines for Conformance Clauses draft

9) Discuss areas for improvement in links from OASIS web site

10) AOB

Minutes

1) Roll Call

Kevin, Patrick, Chet, Ashok, Jacques

2) Agenda

Chet suggested adding new item 9) Discuss editor's manual.

No further discussion. No objections to unanimous approval. Agenda as amended approved.

3) Approval of minutes March 24th

https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/tab/email/archives/201703/msg00062.html

No discussion. No objections. Minutes unanimously approved.

4)Status of public reviews

STIX v2.0 - ended 4/6
Comments provided. Thank you Patrick.

KMIP v1.4 - ends 4/18

Upcoming:
Key Management Interoperability Protocol Test Cases Version 1.4
KMIP Usage Guide Version 1.4
Key Management Interoperability Protocol Profiles Version 1.4

As the KMIP specs are all point releases, we don't see a need to review.

5) Status of open action items

- Patrick to make final edits to conformance clause document and send to the mailing list
Completed. To be discussed later in meeting.

- Chet to review and circulate information on what changes he can make to the OASIS website pages through Drupal.
Completed. To be discussed later.

- Chet to share materials collected as a first step towards an OASIS editors manual.
Completed.

6) Open Standards Cup nominees

Chet explained we need to make selection early this year as Carol wants to give the awards at the Borderless Cyber event in NYC.

Chet sent this year's candidates. Chet will write up blurbs as in years past and send to TAB list.

7) Board Process Committee response to nimble review proposal

Chet shared initial Process Cmte reaction to the nimble review proposal. Group feels the idea has merit and a suggestion was made that rather than defined public review periods during Committee Spec Draft stage, we should just have the notion of a drafting stage and then an open ended call for testing, implementation and feedback that could stay open until the TC was ready to vote to approve a draft as CS.

Further discussion was tabled until the Cmte has dealt with the TC Process streamlining and the Open Prj rules. Very positive first reaction.

8) Approval of latest Guidelines for Conformance Clauses draft

Jacques proposed changes to remove the keywords from one of the examples because he feels keywords should not be used in Conformance Clauses. It confuses them with normative content. Patrick has the opposite point of view but did not object to the changes.

Consensus in the group to make the changes and then publish the work. Chet to make edits, convert to HTML and load to library.

9) Editors manual

Chet recapped the material sent to the TAB so far.

Ashok notes there is material at the W3C that he can review for relevance

Discussed starting a draft Google Doc. Jacques suggests checking the terms of use. Other org's have been cautious about what rights Google gets. Consensus is to check the license terms but also proceed w/ a Google Doc based on our original outline

10) Discuss areas for improvement in links from OASIS web site

Tabled.

10) AOB

Jacques notes that he will not be available for the next meeting in two weeks. The whole week is bad for him.

No other business raised.

Next meeting will be 21 April 2017 at 3:00 EDT.

Minutes respectfully submitted 11 April 2017 by Chet Ensign.

Chat log

Chet: Attending: Kevin, Patrick, Chet, Ashok, Jacques
Chet: 1. Agenda
Chet: Add "Discuss editor's manual" as item 9
Chet: Any other suggestions? Any objs? Agenda appvd
Chet: 3. Minutes
Chet: Any discussion. Any objs. Minutes approved.
Chet: 4. Status fo public reviews.
Chet: No other first reviews coming as of now
Chet: 5. Status of action items
Chet: - Patrick to make final edits to conformance clause document and send to the mailing list
Chet: Closed
Chet: Chet to review and circulate information on what changes he can make to the OASIS website pages through Drupal.
Chet: Closed
Chet: - Chet to share materials collected as a first step towards an OASIS editors manual.
Closed
Chet: 6. Open Stnds cup
Chet: Chet to circulate blurbs next week. Discuss at next meeting then vote. Carol would like decision by May 5
Chet: 7. BPC response to the nimble review proposal
Chet: Recap.
Chet: Ashok - would COS 60 day review be on a fixed doc? yes.
Chet: Jacques - we might get more attention and comment on a COS so I'd be in favor of using the nimble process there as well
Chet: 60 would be long enough that it would be reasonable for editors to be able to modify during that period
Chet: 60 days
Chet: You'd still have the CS at the end of the review period? Yes.
Chet: So there has to be a period of formal request for comments on a draft. Usefulness of a PR is that it notifies the people that it is stable and complete - most people won't take time to comment on a moving target.
Chet: So maybe call it "Last call for comments" or some such.
Chet: Need to convey something like that to encourage people to provide feedback
Chet: 8. Conformance Clauses doc
Chet: Any comments?
Chet: Jacques: have some feedback. One thing that bothers me

jacques (Fujitsu): CC1. In order to claim CC1 conformance a server implementation MUST follow the definitions set forth in Section 1

CC3. A conforming client MUST follow CC1 and the client definitions in Section 3.

Chet: Using keywords in the conf clauses is confusing. Makes it seem like it is normative content
Chet: Rewording

jacques (Fujitsu): CC1. A server implementation can claim CC1 conformance if it follow the definitions set forth in Section 1
jacques (Fujitsu): CC2. A conforming server can claim CC2 conformance if it is conformant according to CC1 and the server definitions in Section 2.
jacques (Fujitsu): CC2. A conforming server can claim CC2 conformance if it is conformant according to CC1 and it follows the server definitions in Section 2.

Chet: This would be a good habit - a best practice
Chet: Patrick: Jacques and I disagree on this. In order to write an RFC, you have to use keywords because they *don't* use conformance clauess.
Chet: Whereas in an OASIS document, if you write the normative prose as statements of fact, you don't need keywords at all
Chet: You could actually dsay these much simpler
Chet: The editors manual shold address this

jacques (Fujitsu): CC3. "A conforming client can claim CC3 conformance if it is conformant according to CC1 and it follows the client definitions in Section 3".

Chet: Kevin: do agree in part. writing some of these would be easier if we didn't have to use keywords. In other sdos, teh document revolves around keywords and that's what implementers look for
Chet: so it would hurt conformance later on down the line.
Chet: P: the expectation is that you're going to have them - so how can we promote good usage.
Chet: K: on a related note, in section one of the template, it lists the keywords and references RFC 2119 - need to keep that in mind as well.
Chet: J: I have nothing against normative content that doens't use key words. But I do have a pblm with using them in conformance clauses.
Chet: J: the clause can explain how to conform without using keywords
Chet: P: the reason I like them in the cc's is that if the normative content spells out the rules, in a c.c. I can say 'if you are a base level client, you MUST be able to read #1 but you MAY be able to read #2" - so I'm using the keywords so that the implementor just has one place to go to find out what to do to create a conforming implementation
Chet: rather than making them hunt through the whole doc for the MUSTS and MAYS and untangle those
Chet: J: I would argue that the cc gains nothing by using the keywords. For me, it is a question of style and avoiding confusion.
Chet: P: so you get stuff like in stix where it says 'to conform you have to do everything normative in the document'
Chet: P: willing to concede on the point

jacques (Fujitsu): CC1. A server implementation can claim CC1 conformance if it follow the definitions set forth in Section 1

CC3. A conforming client can claim CC3 conformance if it is conformant according to CC1 and it follows the client definitions in Section 3.
. jacques (Fujitsu): "Normative content in the body of a specification must never mention conformance, e.g. must not use expressions such as In order to conform, an implementation MUST. Or The following section describes conformance requirements for. Only a conformance clause can do this."

Chet: Ok to publish with those changes made? Yes, consensus is to approve and publish
Chet: Also add Kevin and Chet's names to the TAB list on the cover
Chet: 9 - new ) Editors manual
Chet: Recap on the material I have so far.
Chet: Ashok: there is material at the W3C that I can look at and see if it is relevant
Chet: What if I start a Google Doc to start a draft editor's handbook?
Chet: A: yes
Chet: J: check what terms apply when you use GDs? Other orgs are cautious of that.
Chet: Worth checking first
Chet: P: you mean we actually have to read the user agreement????
Chet: A: maybe Jamie
Chet: Consensus that we should proceed w/ a Google Doc
Chet: Jacques - won't be available 2 weeks from now

jacques (Fujitsu): the whole week 17-21 is bad for me.

Sent transcript to: chet.ensign@oasis-open.org

20170407 (last edited 2017-04-11 17:24:04 by chet.ensign)