Minutes TAB call (February 09, 2018)

Action items

- AI Everyone: review Stefan's last version of the spread sheet and provide feedback on the columns/fields versus the information available in the standards table

- AI Chet: find and send UBL governance CN to the TAB

Agenda

1) Roll call / Welcome Trey

2) Approve agenda

3) Approve minutes

4) Status of action items

5) Review 2017/2018 work items

6) New work item? ISO submission requirements

7) Progress on the editor's manual

8) Progress on the Google sheet

9) AOB

Minutes

1) Roll call

Trey Darley
Patrick Durusau
Chet Ensign
Stefan Hagen

Invited expert:
Ashok Malhotra

Meeting had quorum.

Welcomed Trey to the TAB. Trey is interested in helping modernize the platform (e.g. the move towards markdown driven editing).

2) Approve agenda

No discussion. No objections. Agenda approved.

3) Approve minutes

Jan. 26 2018 https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/tab/201802/msg00000.html

No discussion. No objections. Minutes approved.

4) Status of action items

- AI Everyone: review Stefan's last version of the spread sheet and provide feedback on the columns/fields versus the information available in the standards table

Open.

5) Review 2017/2018 work items

Chet provided background on work items for Trey.

Discussion about the status of the work items.

Stefan / Patrick suggested that we should go back to staff about how we can be of help in the strategic topics - esp the IT evolution.

Ashok asked what has happened with the Open Projects initiative. Chet provided an update.

Patrick asked about the IPR issues he raised. Chet explained how the IP lawyers from multiple Board member companies provided input. They believe with the addition made to CLA to cover derivative uses and patent protections, we can offer equivalent coverage as we do with TC work products, with the benefit that protections apply immediately after submission.

Trey asked how this compares with what Apache is doing. Chet summarized that both are evolving in the direction of doing both OS and standards under one roof/regime, but we are bringing a strong, vetted, respected standards brand to the table.

Trey suggests that we need more definition around the types of projects we think we'll offer value to.

Stefan suggests that SARIF might have evolved differently had this been an option.

Discussion about using governance over groups to develop specs that enable interoperability. This could be a topic for the TAB to draft suggestions on.

6) New work item? ISO submission requirements

Agreement that we should add this as a Tactical work item. Maybe as a white paper and maybe as suggested changes to the OASIS template.

7) Progress on the editor's manual

Tabled

8) Progress on the Google sheet

Stefan reported that he expects to have the full set of records from the standards page extracted into the spread sheet by the next meeting.

9) AOB

No other business was raised.

Next meeting on 23 February 2018 at 3:00 PM eastern. Minutes submitted by Chet Ensign on February 13th 2018.

=== Chat log ===
2018-02-09 GMT+00:00
[19:51] Chet: TAB conference call Revised agenda 1) Roll call / Welcome Trey 2) Approve agenda 3) Approve minutes Jan. 26 2018 https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/tab/201802/msg00000.html 4) Status of action items - AI Everyone: review Stefan's last version of the spread sheet and provide feedback on the columns/fields versus the information available in the standards table 5) Review 2017/2018 work items 6) New work item? ISO submission requirements 7) Progress on the editor's manual 8) Progress on the Google sheet 9) AOB
[20:04] anonymous morphed into Patrick
[20:04] Chet: Attending: Stefan, Patrick, Trey, Chet, Ashok
[20:05] Chet: Welcome Trey
[20:06] Chet: Trey: want to help modernize the platform
[20:06] Chet: e.g. the move towards markdown driven editing
[20:07] Chet: 2. Agenda
[20:07] Chet: No discussion. No objs. Agenda approved.
[20:07] Chet: 3. Minutes
[20:07] Chet: No discussion. No obj's. Minutes approved.
[20:07] Chet: 4. Action items
[20:08] Chet: - AI Everyone: review Stefan's last version of the spread sheet and provide feedback on the columns/fields versus the information available in the standards table
[20:08] Chet: Stays open.
[20:08] Chet: 5. Work items
[20:08] Chet: 2017/2018 TAB Work Plan The TAB work plan for 2017/2018 is now approved. Strategic Support staff in the development of the new OASIS IT tools and interfaces (E.g. testing; 'as a chair perspective) Support staff with the self-cert undertaking in the CTI and LegalDocML TCs Tactical Develop master citation list to track OASIS work product progress and act as a master citation list for OASIS Standards and Committee Specifications (similar to W3C and IETF lists) Find opportunities to automate tasks to help members / staff increase productivity (e.g. generating the text of announcements, ballots, templates) Take steps to support TCs and editors get started on a good footing (e.g. presentations to TCs during their first meetings; offer office-hour-type meetings with editors) Guidance / Best Practices Complete the OASIS Editor's manual Draft OASIS Chairs manual Draft advice to TCs on how to use collaborative editing tools Review / reorganize TAB homepage and TAB documents Ongoing Comments to TCs on 1st public reviews Maintain W3C and IETF citation master lists
[20:09] anonymous morphed into Trey Darley
[20:16] Chet: Stefan: we should go back to staff about how we could be of help in the strategic topics - esp the IT evolution
[20:18] Chet: S: Guidance for Editors / Chairs / Collab tools - S suggested we shift office hours to after the guidance documents - editors/chairs need some short documents we can point to
[20:18] Chet: Ashok: where did the open src initiative go?
[20:20] Chet: Chet: it wasn't on my radar then
[20:22] Chet: Trey: can you unpack that a bit?
[20:22] Chet: C: background on OPs
[20:22] Chet: S: I think that is under the first item in strategic
[20:23] Chet: P: last status I recall was that we had identified an IP issue on how they could proceed and no decision had been made.
[20:23] Chet: C: summarizes
[20:30] Chet: C: attorneys from the boards had looked this over
[20:32] Trey Darley: Running code => open standards vs. open standards => running code?
[20:33] Trey Darley: E.g., https://github.com/VirusTotal/yara
[20:37] Chet: Good example Trey.
[20:38] Chet: Need more definition around the types of projects we think we'll offer value to
[20:38] Trey Darley: Wrt the notion of Open Projects, I think the technical details of *hosting* Open Projects is how we communicate the OASIS value proposition to a candidate project.
[20:39] Trey Darley: Hrm, soaphub doesn't play nicely with unicode. In between "I think" and "the technical details" was the GTE symbol.
[20:41] Chet: S: SARIF - if it had started when OPs went live, if MS had put out a started with a bunch of filters, then it might have worked out that all those projects decided that the information model / format needed to be standard.
[20:43] Chet: S: TCs have problems that are solved through prose. The tools are opening up from 'I can describe this generaically' - to a solution that 'we have solutions that are implemented at the same time as the standard develops
[20:44] Chet: T: CTI has focused on how we deal with interoperability - big sitcking point for previous versions.
[20:45] Chet: T:: we have this process that is being refined where, for new additions to the standard, there are some gating factors: e.g. 2 sponsors; functional tests - and then driving the whole development from those use cases. So recognizing the value of running code but in a structured way, not wild wild west.
[20:46] Chet: T: we'll have a work flow document by the next TC meeting
[20:47] Chet: T: so by the time editors go through the leg work of polishing prose, a lot of the uncertainty has been removed about whether it will actually work
[20:48] Chet: S: important to have some strong companies in your TC.
[20:49] Chet: S: many communities arrive at a governance process
[20:50] Chet: S: important to show that you need proponents / scenarios, functional tests, feature branch - that you have to provide some evidence -- but don't want to set up a process that would be too difficult for smaller TCs
[20:51] Trey Darley: This sould be a recommendation that TCs could choose to adopt, not mandatory.
[20:51] Trey Darley: s/sould/should
[20:51] Stefan: Yes
[20:52] Chet: Chet: find and send link to the UBL governance document to TAB
[20:53] Chet: T: is there a hard limit on the number of TAB members
[20:53] Stefan: ... and like most open source projects have a CONTRIBUTING document eventually showing how to best adapt any proposed changes befor being considered
[20:55] Trey Darley: A TAB of 20 would probably be ineffectual. A TAB of 9, more so.
[20:57] Chet: S: good with time on the agenda. would not want to be on a group that the board can pressure. think there is value in the members electing the memories of the TAB
[20:57] Trey Darley: wrt the sensitivity of the platform shit.
[20:57] Trey Darley: s/shit/shift
[20:57] Trey Darley: (Paging Dr. Freud...)
[20:58] Stefan: Oh no!
[20:58] Stefan: Nit Sigmund on the TAB
[20:59] Trey Darley: @Stefan: +1
[21:00] Chet: S: #6 - ISO submission - YES! we should take this up as an aid
[21:00] Chet: S: let's consider putting it as a tactical work item
[21:02] Chet: P: background. TCs will need to be putting stuff in ISO standard on their second round
[21:03] Chet: maybe the TAB can make recommendations to the TCs on how to do their work if they want to go to ISO. and maybe suggest changes to the OAISS template
[21:04] Trey Darley: RFC2119 is one of the more *popular* RFCs...
[21:05] Stefan: Yes, but already uppercased ,-)
[21:05] Trey Darley: Thanks, all
[21:06] Chet: S: for me - about 8000 records from the standards page - will try to get the full one done in two weeks

20180209 (last edited 2018-02-13 21:55:48 by chet.ensign)