[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: KAVI

• To: "'karl.best@o...'" <karl.best@o...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: KAVI
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2003 16:11:42 -0600

The difficulty of process design is to ensure
that work and effort are removed, not added, 
while ensuring the quality of the work is 
the same or better.   While it is useful to 
the organization for members to get value 
by membership, exclusivity does not provide 
value.   Value is provided by ensuring the 
work is of the highest quality possible, and 
for a specification or standards organization, 
this is doubly true.   The goal of specification 
is clearly productization; whereas, the goal 
of standardization is the highest possible 
quality for all products of a given type.  If 
the rights of members are to be construed as 
to having the earliest access to information 
valuable to productization, then it is to their 
benefit to ensure it is information of the 
highest quality and exclusivity does not 
guarantee or even contribute to this.
  
If non-members cannot contribute at the earliest 
phases of specification or standardization, 
it is possible to lose valuable information 
needed to ensure quality products and quality 
standards.   While the openness of OASIS 
in comparison to some organizations is not 
in dispute, the side effect of automatic 
enforcement may be particularly damaging 
in nascent areas of specification.  Some 
expertise will automatically become unavailable 
to OASIS when the latitude formerly available
to the chairs is removed for discretion with 
regards to where discussions are held.  This 
is particularly true in the early phases.

Another predictable effect is that innovation requiring 
research and narrow bands of expertise will 
move away from the organizations whose policies 
do not enable that latitude.  As in the non-RAND 
policy of the W3C, the predictable effect is 
a narrowing of the scope of the domains which this 
organization can reasonably be expected to 
work.  Yet it is the wide scope of discussion that 
often enables new areas with encumbered technologies 
to be discovered early.

It may be the case that lack of discretionary policy 
for the chairs will have the effect of limiting 
discussion in ways deleterious to the quality of 
the organizational products.

Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.

len bullard

-----Original Message-----
From: Karl Best [mailto:karl.best@o...]

Nothing at OASIS is done behind closed doors, but we must also require 
that the members of the TC who are doing the technical work and making 
the decisions are members of OASIS; to do otherwise would diminish the 
value of membership in the consortium, and as it is the members of the 
consortium who provide the resources to support this work through the 
payment of their membership dues it is not fair to them that other, 
non-paying participants would have the same rights.

So, in summary, there is absolutely no change of policy here, just the 
new ability to use a system to enforce what previosuly we left up to the 
chairs to enforce.

• Prev by Date: Re: parameter-entity references
• Next by Date: Re: Urgent !!
• Previous by thread: RE: KAVI
• Next by thread: RE: Problem with Inserted space and Character on Solaris
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread