Date   
Re: [oslc-op] The PDB has approved to publish CM 3.0 PSD03

Andrii Berezovskyi
 

Thanks Jim! Yay, the first approved document by the PGB ūüéČ

 

A small correction: the ballot will request the PGB to promote PSD03 to PS03.

 

--

‚ÄďAndrew.

 

Från: <oslc-op@...> på uppdrag av Jim Amsden <jamsden@...>
Svara till: "oslc-op@..." <oslc-op@...>, Jim Amsden <jamsden@...>
Datum: torsdag, 8 augusti 2019, W32 17:32
Till: "oslc-op@..." <oslc-op@...>
√Ąmne: [oslc-op] The PDB has approved to publish CM 3.0 PSD03

 

The vote (https://lists.oasis-open-projects.org/g/oslc-op-pgb/message/16?p=,,,20,0,0,0::created,,,20,2,0,6453) was approved with 3 votes.

This is our first published document as the oslc-op. Once this is actually published, we will immediately schedule a PGB vote for a CM Project Specification. This will require approval by OASIS and will give us an opportunity to address any document formatting, layout, or content issues OASIS may have.  We can use PSD03 as the source document, and hopefully resolve any OASIS issues during the 14 day voting period for the PS04.

I will schedule the CM 3.0 PS04 vote as soon as the PSD03 is published.



--
Jim Amsden, Senior Technical Staff Member
ELM Quality Manager
919-525-6575

What's next for publishing oslc-op specifications

Jim Amsden
 

We are finally getting the remaining ReSpec changes done in order to be able to render HTML for the oslc-op specifications. Thanks to Nick and Andrew for all the work they've contributed to this important component of our development procersds.

Our ultimate goal is to get these six multi-part specifications to Candidate OASIS Standard as soon as possible:
1. Architecture Management 2.1
2. Change Management 3.0
3. OSLC Core 3.0
4. Quality Management 2.1
5. OSLC Query 3.0
6. Requirements Management 2.1

I have created a summary of Open Project specification lifecycle process in https://github.com/oslc-op/oslc-specs/wiki/Open-Project-Specification-Lifecycle-Processeswith some additional oslc-op specific details. This document will need to be updated as we push the first document through the process, but its a start.

Here's a rough state machine that summarizes that process:

WD -- PGB vote--> PSD revision -- PGB SMV vote and OASIS conformance review approval --> published PS revision -- 3 statements of use + PGB SMV--> COS --> 60 day public review + OASIS OP Admin issuing call for consent to approve COS as OS --> OASIS Standard


Each PGB vote is open for 14 days. This serializes the process for a specification, be we could do many in parallel.

Here's what's left to be done:

1. Complete and final ReSpec Update and merges (in progress, should be completed today)

2. PGB vote to create Change Management 3.0 as PSD03 (in progress, waiting for votes, closes 1 Aug)

3. OASIS OP Admin reviews  Change Management 3.0 as PSD03 for specification conformance (ahead of vote for PS03 in order to address any formatting issues in this first published OP document)

4. Do any final edits and/or ReSpec changes to address OASIS specification conformance issues (if any)

5. Schedule PGB SMV to promote Change Management 3.0 as PSD03 to PS03.

6. OASIS publishes  Change Management 3.0 PS03.

7. All OASIS and open-services.net redirects for access to Change Management 3.0 PS03 are done and tested.

8. Schedule PGB SMV to promote Change Management 3.0 as PS03 to COS and schedule 60 day public review

9. Collect one more statement of use for Change Management 3.0

10. Assuming no issues are raised during public review that require a specification revision: ask OASIS OP Admin to issue a call for consent to  promote Change Management 3.0 COS to OS. Does this require a PDB vote?

Following step 7 on the Change Management 3.0 spec, we can repeat the process in parallel for the other five multi-part specifications.

Regarding those specifications, there may be further actions:

We need to catch up on the issues and make sure we've addressed all the ones that are needed before publishing a PS.

We need to publish the vocabularies and shapes on open-services.net/ns. Not sure when this should be done. Perhaps not until we reached OASIS Standard?


Architecture Management:

A significant issue has been raised: https://github.com/oslc-op/oslc-specs/issues/69that calls to question the viability of the proposed AM 2.1 specification. The issue is that there a no properties that define connections between oslc_am:Resource and other OSLC domain resources. This reflects a significant shift in design and implementation of the AM 2.0 specification at open-services.net that was never resolved or completed in the 2.1 specification.

Requirements Management:

We should probably address issue "Should we deprecate the "inverse" properties defined in RM 2.1" (https://github.com/oslc-op/oslc-specs/issues/82) before creating an RM 3.0 PS.

Quality Management:

Has some vocabulary cleanup and other issues that need to be resolved before a PS is published.




--
Jim Amsden, Senior Technical Staff Member
ELM Quality Manager
919-525-6575

Re: Submit OSLC CM 2.1 for publishing as PSD03

Axel Reichwein
 

Thanks! I actually do see everything! Maybe I didn't look carefully the first time :)

Re: Submit OSLC CM 2.1 for publishing as PSD03

Andrii Berezovskyi
 

Nope, you should see the spec with the intro. Please try disabling uBlock/Privacy Badger for the page:

 

 

 

--

‚ÄďAndrew.

 

Från: Axel Reichwein <axel.reichwein@...>
Datum: torsdag, 18 juli 2019, W29 19:15
Till: Andrii Berezovskyi <andriib@...>, "oslc-op-pgb@..." <oslc-op-pgb@...>
√Ąmne: Re: [oslc-op-pgb] Submit OSLC CM 2.1 for publishing as PSD03

 

Thanks. 

In this doc https://oslc-op.github.io/oslc-specs/specs/cm/change-mgt-spec.html
the spec seems a bit empty. Is this normal? There is no introduction into the spec. 

FYI, I found that several links were broken. 

However, I was able to see the vocab at https://oslc-op.github.io/oslc-specs/specs/cm/change-mgt-spec.html

Re: Submit OSLC CM 2.1 for publishing as PSD03

Axel Reichwein
 

Thanks. 

In this doc https://oslc-op.github.io/oslc-specs/specs/cm/change-mgt-spec.html
the spec seems a bit empty. Is this normal? There is no introduction into the spec. 

FYI, I found that several links were broken. 

However, I was able to see the vocab at https://oslc-op.github.io/oslc-specs/specs/cm/change-mgt-spec.html

Re: Submit OSLC CM 2.1 for publishing as PSD03

Andrii Berezovskyi
 

Thanks Axel,

 

CM is Change Management

CfgM is Configuration Management

 

The link to the latest draft that will be promoted to the PSD03: https://oslc-op.github.io/oslc-specs/specs/cm/change-mgt-spec.html

 

And one more correction: we are talking about the OSLC Change Management v3.0 (CM v3.0) Project Specification Draft rev. 3 (PSD03), not about v2.1.

 

--

‚ÄďAndrew.

 

Från: <oslc-op-pgb@...> på uppdrag av Axel Reichwein <axel.reichwein@...>
Svara till: "oslc-op-pgb@..." <oslc-op-pgb@...>, "axel.reichwein@..." <axel.reichwein@...>
Datum: torsdag, 18 juli 2019, W29 18:05
Till: Jim Amsden <jamsden@...>, "oslc-op-pgb@..." <oslc-op-pgb@...>
√Ąmne: Re: [oslc-op-pgb] Submit OSLC CM 2.1 for publishing as PSD03

 

On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 08:12 AM, Jim Amsden wrote:

OSLC CM2.1

What is eaxtly OSLC CM2.1? Can you share a link to the document? CM = change management or configuration management?

Re: Submit OSLC CM 2.1 for publishing as PSD03

Axel Reichwein
 

On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 08:12 AM, Jim Amsden wrote:
OSLC CM2.1
What is eaxtly OSLC CM2.1? Can you share a link to the document? CM = change management or configuration management?

Re: Submit OSLC CM 2.1 for publishing as PSD03 #poll

Andrii Berezovskyi
 

Thanks Jim, I have just cast my vote. The PGB has 14 days to approve the current WD as the PSD03. Please cast your votes too!

 

--

‚ÄďAndrew.

 

Från: <oslc-op-pgb@...> på uppdrag av Jim Amsden <jamsden@...>
Svara till: "oslc-op-pgb@..." <oslc-op-pgb@...>, Jim Amsden <jamsden@...>
Datum: torsdag, 18 juli 2019, W29 17:12
Till: "oslc-op-pgb@..." <oslc-op-pgb@...>
√Ąmne: [oslc-op-pgb] Submit OSLC CM 2.1 for publishing as PSD03 #poll

 

A new poll has been created:

Do the OSLC PGB members approve publishing OSLC CM2.1 revision 03 as PSD03?

1. Yes, approve pubublishing
2. No, needs more work

Vote Now

Submit OSLC CM 3.0 for publishing as PSD03 #poll

Jim Amsden
 

Do the OSLC PGB members approve publishing OSLC CM2.1 revision 03 as PSD03?

Results

See Who Responded

Re: Incorporating open-services.net site maintenance into oslc-op #poll

Jim Amsden
 

Chet,
Is this new template in https://github.com/oslc-op/oslc-admin. If so, I don't think the PFB members are subscribed to these issues and won't be notified of the ballot.

Same with https://github.com/oslc-op/oslc-specs, this might only have the TSC members, and many of those members are not PGB members and shouldn't receive ballots.

This is why I used the group poll.



--
Jim Amsden, Senior Technical Staff Member
ELM Quality Manager
919-525-6575




From:        "Chet Ensign" <chet.ensign@...>
To:        oslc-op-pgb@..., Chet Ensign <chet.ensign@...>
Date:        07/01/2019 03:03 PM
Subject:        [EXTERNAL] Re: [oslc-op-pgb] Incorporating open-services.net site maintenance into oslc-op
Sent by:        oslc-op-pgb@...




I just added a template for Special Majority Votes. Jim, your template for votes looks fine for all other purposes. If you want me to set up other templates, let me know... 


On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 2:37 PM Chet Ensign via Lists.Oasis-Open-Projects.Org<chet.ensign=oasis-open.org@...> wrote:
I am putting together a ballot template now. I'll share it with you all in a bit. 


On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 2:13 PM Andrii Berezovskyi <andriib@...> wrote:
Anyway, thanks for the ballot. I just cast my vote.

--
/Andrew
(from phone)



On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 8:10 PM +0200, "Andrii Berezovskyi" <andriib@...> wrote:

I thought we and Chet agreed that Github is a more permanent place for the votes?


--



/chet 
----------------

Chet Ensign
Chief Technical Community Steward
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society

http://www.oasis-open.org

Mobile: +1 201-341-1393 



--

/chet 
----------------

Chet Ensign
Chief Technical Community Steward
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society

http://www.oasis-open.org

Mobile: +1 201-341-1393 




Re: Incorporating open-services.net site maintenance into oslc-op #poll

Chet Ensign
 

Ah. I see. Ok, let's see how this works. My thinking is that the GitHub issues are more reliably permanent and addressable. If the groups.io poll works the same way, that can do the job. 


On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 3:13 PM Jim Amsden <jamsden@...> wrote:
Chet,
Is this new template in https://github.com/oslc-op/oslc-admin. If so, I don't think the PFB members are subscribed to these issues and won't be notified of the ballot.

Same with https://github.com/oslc-op/oslc-specs, this might only have the TSC members, and many of those members are not PGB members and shouldn't receive ballots.

This is why I used the group poll.



--
Jim Amsden, Senior Technical Staff Member
ELM Quality Manager
919-525-6575




From:        "Chet Ensign" <chet.ensign@...>
To:        oslc-op-pgb@..., Chet Ensign <chet.ensign@...>
Date:        07/01/2019 03:03 PM
Subject:        [EXTERNAL] Re: [oslc-op-pgb] Incorporating open-services.net site maintenance into oslc-op
Sent by:        oslc-op-pgb@...




I just added a template for Special Majority Votes. Jim, your template for votes looks fine for all other purposes. If you want me to set up other templates, let me know... 

On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 2:37 PM Chet Ensign via Lists.Oasis-Open-Projects.Org<chet.ensign=oasis-open.org@...> wrote:
I am putting together a ballot template now. I'll share it with you all in a bit. 


On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 2:13 PM Andrii Berezovskyi <andriib@...> wrote:
Anyway, thanks for the ballot. I just cast my vote.

--
/Andrew
(from phone)



On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 8:10 PM +0200, "Andrii Berezovskyi" <andriib@...> wrote:

I thought we and Chet agreed that Github is a more permanent place for the votes?


--



/chet 
----------------

Chet Ensign
Chief Technical Community Steward
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society

http://www.oasis-open.org

Mobile: +1 201-341-1393 



--

/chet 
----------------

Chet Ensign
Chief Technical Community Steward
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society

http://www.oasis-open.org

Mobile: +1 201-341-1393 






--

/chet 
----------------
Chet Ensign
Chief Technical Community Steward
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society
http://www.oasis-open.org

Mobile: +1 201-341-1393 

Re: Incorporating open-services.net site maintenance into oslc-op #poll

Chet Ensign
 

I just added a template for Special Majority Votes. Jim, your template for votes looks fine for all other purposes. If you want me to set up other templates, let me know... 


On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 2:37 PM Chet Ensign via Lists.Oasis-Open-Projects.Org <chet.ensign=oasis-open.org@...> wrote:
I am putting together a ballot template now. I'll share it with you all in a bit. 

On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 2:13 PM Andrii Berezovskyi <andriib@...> wrote:
Anyway, thanks for the ballot. I just cast my vote.

--
/Andrew
(from phone)



On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 8:10 PM +0200, "Andrii Berezovskyi" <andriib@...> wrote:

I thought we and Chet agreed that Github is a more permanent place for the votes?



--

/chet 
----------------
Chet Ensign
Chief Technical Community Steward
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society
http://www.oasis-open.org

Mobile: +1 201-341-1393 



--

/chet 
----------------
Chet Ensign
Chief Technical Community Steward
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society
http://www.oasis-open.org

Mobile: +1 201-341-1393 

Re: Incorporating open-services.net site maintenance into oslc-op #poll

Chet Ensign
 

I am putting together a ballot template now. I'll share it with you all in a bit. 


On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 2:13 PM Andrii Berezovskyi <andriib@...> wrote:
Anyway, thanks for the ballot. I just cast my vote.

--
/Andrew
(from phone)



On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 8:10 PM +0200, "Andrii Berezovskyi" <andriib@...> wrote:

I thought we and Chet agreed that Github is a more permanent place for the votes?



--

/chet 
----------------
Chet Ensign
Chief Technical Community Steward
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society
http://www.oasis-open.org

Mobile: +1 201-341-1393 

Re: Incorporating open-services.net site maintenance into oslc-op #poll

Andrii Berezovskyi
 

Anyway, thanks for the ballot. I just cast my vote.

--
/Andrew
(from phone)



On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 8:10 PM +0200, "Andrii Berezovskyi" <andriib@...> wrote:

I thought we and Chet agreed that Github is a more permanent place for the votes?

Re: Incorporating open-services.net site maintenance into oslc-op #poll

Andrii Berezovskyi
 

I thought we and Chet agreed that Github is a more permanent place for the votes?

Incorporating open-services.net site maintenance into oslc-op #poll

Jim Amsden
 

Should we migrate the site sources under oslc-op/oslc-website?

The oslc-op PGB has already decided to act as the governing body for open-services.net. So it makes sense to migrate the https://github.com/OSLC/oslc-site-hugo from the GitHub external OSLC organization to the https://github.com/oslc-op organization.

Results

See Who Responded

Re: Test

Axel Reichwein
 

yes :)

[OSLC/oslc-site-hugo] Migrate to the OP? (#245)

Andrii Berezovskyi
 

Jim,

I agree that we should keep PGB in the loop on all major decisions but I don’t think we should require the project to wait for the next PGB meeting to sort urgent tech and org issues out, such as whether to use open-services.net to host persistent spec URIs.

I think all such matters should be handled by the TSC and every PGB member is welcome to join the TSC.

Speaking of which, I recall that my earlier email asking for the next meeting date did not get any replies. So, when shall we have the next PGB meeting?

--
/Andrew
(from phone)


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Jim Amsden" <notifications@...>
Date: Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 3:30 PM +0200
Subject: Re: [OSLC/oslc-site-hugo] Migrate to the OP? (#245)
To: "OSLC/oslc-site-hugo" <oslc-site-hugo@...>
Cc: "Andrii Berezovskyi" <andriib@...>, "Assign" <assign@...>


Not a good idea for the TSC to decide - need PGB input. I would especially like to hear Axel and Bill's views.

I think the 14 days is only for PSD and PS votes. This is probably to ensure the PGB members have time to review the documents. The PGB should be able to vote on this in a meeting or electronic vote anytime. Most PGB members should be pretty familiar with open-services.net.

‚ÄĒ
You are receiving this because you were assigned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

Re: Submitting the Quality Management Open Project Specification for public review

Andrii Berezovskyi
 

Very much appreciated, Chet! Have a nice weekend!

--
/Andrew
(from phone)



On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 8:03 PM +0200, "Chet Ensign" <chet.ensign@...> wrote:

Slowly but surely, I am getting oriented to where we are and catching up... 

On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 5:48 PM Andrii Berezovskyi <andriib@...> wrote:

I want to make sure I got this right, so let me make some comments and please correct me if I got this wrong in any way:

1) We are not submitting a spec for public review.

The OP rules do not require that so yes, that is fine. 

Instead, OP maintainers are preparing to ask the PGB to approve a Project Specification Draft 04 (we will skip PSDs 1 to 3 for Core to avoid any confusion with the CSPRDs 1 to 3 published by the Core TC, I don't know how many CSPRDs were published by the Domains TC for the QM spec). The only approval required for this is from PGB, with 14 days notice.

Correct. And approving it as PSD04 is fine.  

No approval from OASIS administrator is needed: https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/open-projects-process#project-specifications, §13.3 (not sure what does the term Designated Branch refers to).

Right, no approval needed from us. By 'designated branch' we were trying to say, basically, you should approve a labeled branch that  people can get back to later if they want to review the evolution of the TC work product.  

2) We do not have to use OASIS infrastructure to publish a PSD or to produce PDFs. We are planning to make a PR with the changes to the document revision, status and links and tag it on Github with a tag 'psd-04', for example.

Correct. 


3) I suggest to have all comments on the PSDs to be submitted as Github issues.

That is certainly a good way to do it process-wise. But personally, I wouldn't rule out that you might get good comments via the email list.   

4) The specification will not be provided under the Apache 2.0 license. Apache license is best suited for the source code. The text of the spec will be CC BY 4.0 licensed (Attribution 4.0 International). Vocabulary and OSLC Shape machine-readable documents will be provided under the Apache 2.0 license. Did I miss something?

That is fine - your call.  


Also, we had some discussion in the OP call regarding the naming of the specs and publishing of the PDFs. Chet, we are still working it out but I would appreaciate if you follow/participate in https://github.com/oslc-op/oslc-admin/issues/6.

Yes, I have been working my way through the discussions. I definitely have some questions to discuss with you there. Will get those thoughts together today.  


/Andrew

From: Chet Ensign <chet.ensign@...>
Sent: 26 June 2019 23:51
To: Jim Amsden
Cc: Andrii Berezovskyi
Subject: Re: Submitting the Quality Management Open Project Specification for public review
 
Jim, Andrew, I'm spending the afternoon catching up on all this. Apologies for falling behind... 

On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 2:00 PM Jim Amsden <jamsden@...> wrote:

1. Make sure the oslc-op@... mailing list is working so that we can collaborate appropriately.
Yes and that's done.  

2. Finalize the text for the Status section of the Open Project in ReSpec. I suggest the following content:
Yes, this section looks good.  

This document was last revised or approved by the OASIS OSLC Open Projecton the above date. The level of approval is also listed above. Check the ‚ÄúLatest version‚ÄĚ location noted above for possible later revisions of this document.

Comments on this specification can be sent to the OSLC Open Project‚Äôs public comment list oslc-op@..., after subscribing to it by following the instructions in ‚ÄúContributing‚ÄĚ at https://github.com/oslc-op/oslc-admin/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md.
That sounds right. I'll look at the text in CONTRIB now and may make a suggestion via pull request.  

This specification is being provided under the Apache 2.0 License and Attribution 4.0 International.
Suggest linking these to the licenses. Apache 2.0 - https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 - CC-BY 4.0 -  https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
 
Note that any machine-readable content (Computer Language Definitions) declared Normative for this Work Product is provided in separate plain text files. In the event of a discrepancy between any such plain text file and display content in the Work Product's prose narrative document(s), the content in the separate plain text file prevails.

3. The https://github.com/oslc-op/oslc-admin/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.mdsection does not describe the process for subscribing to the oslc-op mailing list - assuming that's what will be used for public review comments, and does not yet describe the feedback licensing terms. Is there a link we should include in the Status section that describes the feedback process and licensing implications? Something similar to https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/comments/index.php?wg_abbrev=oslc-corebut for open projects?
Not yet. Let me sort that out.  

4. The content of the Notices section needs to be finalized. Here's what we currently have

Copyright © OASIS Open 20189. All Rights Reserved.

All capitalized terms in the following text have the meanings assigned to them in the OASIS Intellectual Property Rights Policy (the "OASIS IPR Policy"). The full Policy may be found at the OASIS website.

This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published, and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this section are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, including by removing the copyright notice or references to OASIS, except as needed for the purpose of developing any document or deliverable produced by an OASIS Open Project (in which case the rules applicable to copyrights, as set forth in the OASIS IPR Policy, must be followed) or as required to translate it into languages other than English.

The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked by OASIS or its successors or assigns.

This document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS IS" basis and OASIS DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY OWNERSHIP RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

OASIS requests that any OASIS Party or any other party that believes it has patent claims that would necessarily be infringed by implementations of this OASIS Project Specification or OASIS Standard, to notify OASIS TCOpen Project (OP) Administrator and provide an indication of its willingness to grant patent licenses to such patent claims in a manner consistent with the IPR Mode licensing of the OASIS Open Project that produced this specification.

OASIS invites any party to contact the OASIS TC OP Administrator if it is aware of a claim of ownership of any patent claims that would necessarily be infringed by implementations of this specification by a patent holder that is not willing to provide a license to such patent claims in a manner consistent with the IPR Mode licensing of the OASIS Open Project that produced this specification. OASIS may include such claims on its website, but disclaims any obligation to do so.

OASIS takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on OASIS' procedures with respect to rights in any document or deliverable produced by an OASIS Open Project can be found on the OASIS website. Copies of claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this OASIS Project Specification or OASIS Standard, can be obtained from the OASIS TC OP Administrator. OASIS makes no representation that any information or list of intellectual property rights will at any time be complete, or that any claims in such list are, in fact, Essential Claims.

The name "OASIS" is a trademark of OASIS, the owner and developer of this specification, and should be used only to refer to the organization and its official outputs. OASIS welcomes reference to, and implementation and use of, specifications, while reserving the right to enforce its marks against misleading uses. Please see https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/trademark for above guidance.


5. Determine a process for publishing open project specifications on OASIS
  • Determine the URL pattern for the published specifications
Yes. Still TBD. 
  • Publish rendered specifications to OASIS
I'm not sure what you mean by 'publish' here. Hand them off to us to load and announce? 
I'm not sure of the import of this either. Are the resource shapes something different from the QM Spec?  

Anything else?

--
Jim Amsden, Senior Technical Staff Member
ELM Quality Manager
919-525-6575



--

/chet 
----------------
Chet Ensign
Chief Technical Community Steward
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society
http://www.oasis-open.org

Mobile: +1 201-341-1393 


--

/chet 
----------------
Chet Ensign
Chief Technical Community Steward
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society
http://www.oasis-open.org

Mobile: +1 201-341-1393 

Re: Submitting the Quality Management Open Project Specification for public review

Chet Ensign
 

Slowly but surely, I am getting oriented to where we are and catching up... 

On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 5:48 PM Andrii Berezovskyi <andriib@...> wrote:

I want to make sure I got this right, so let me make some comments and please correct me if I got this wrong in any way:

1) We are not submitting a spec for public review.

The OP rules do not require that so yes, that is fine. 

Instead, OP maintainers are preparing to ask the PGB to approve a Project Specification Draft 04 (we will skip PSDs 1 to 3 for Core to avoid any confusion with the CSPRDs 1 to 3 published by the Core TC, I don't know how many CSPRDs were published by the Domains TC for the QM spec). The only approval required for this is from PGB, with 14 days notice.

Correct. And approving it as PSD04 is fine.  

No approval from OASIS administrator is needed: https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/open-projects-process#project-specifications, §13.3 (not sure what does the term Designated Branch refers to).

Right, no approval needed from us. By 'designated branch' we were trying to say, basically, you should approve a labeled branch that  people can get back to later if they want to review the evolution of the TC work product.  

2) We do not have to use OASIS infrastructure to publish a PSD or to produce PDFs. We are planning to make a PR with the changes to the document revision, status and links and tag it on Github with a tag 'psd-04', for example.

Correct. 


3) I suggest to have all comments on the PSDs to be submitted as Github issues.

That is certainly a good way to do it process-wise. But personally, I wouldn't rule out that you might get good comments via the email list.   

4) The specification will not be provided under the Apache 2.0 license. Apache license is best suited for the source code. The text of the spec will be CC BY 4.0 licensed (Attribution 4.0 International). Vocabulary and OSLC Shape machine-readable documents will be provided under the Apache 2.0 license. Did I miss something?

That is fine - your call.  


Also, we had some discussion in the OP call regarding the naming of the specs and publishing of the PDFs. Chet, we are still working it out but I would appreaciate if you follow/participate in https://github.com/oslc-op/oslc-admin/issues/6.

Yes, I have been working my way through the discussions. I definitely have some questions to discuss with you there. Will get those thoughts together today.  


/Andrew

From: Chet Ensign <chet.ensign@...>
Sent: 26 June 2019 23:51
To: Jim Amsden
Cc: Andrii Berezovskyi
Subject: Re: Submitting the Quality Management Open Project Specification for public review
 
Jim, Andrew, I'm spending the afternoon catching up on all this. Apologies for falling behind... 

On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 2:00 PM Jim Amsden <jamsden@...> wrote:

1. Make sure the oslc-op@... mailing list is working so that we can collaborate appropriately.
Yes and that's done.  

2. Finalize the text for the Status section of the Open Project in ReSpec. I suggest the following content:
Yes, this section looks good.  

This document was last revised or approved by the OASIS OSLC Open Projecton the above date. The level of approval is also listed above. Check the ‚ÄúLatest version‚ÄĚ location noted above for possible later revisions of this document.

Comments on this specification can be sent to the OSLC Open Project‚Äôs public comment list oslc-op@..., after subscribing to it by following the instructions in ‚ÄúContributing‚ÄĚ at https://github.com/oslc-op/oslc-admin/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md.
That sounds right. I'll look at the text in CONTRIB now and may make a suggestion via pull request.  

This specification is being provided under the Apache 2.0 License and Attribution 4.0 International.
Suggest linking these to the licenses. Apache 2.0 - https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 - CC-BY 4.0 -  https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
 
Note that any machine-readable content (Computer Language Definitions) declared Normative for this Work Product is provided in separate plain text files. In the event of a discrepancy between any such plain text file and display content in the Work Product's prose narrative document(s), the content in the separate plain text file prevails.

3. The https://github.com/oslc-op/oslc-admin/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.mdsection does not describe the process for subscribing to the oslc-op mailing list - assuming that's what will be used for public review comments, and does not yet describe the feedback licensing terms. Is there a link we should include in the Status section that describes the feedback process and licensing implications? Something similar to https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/comments/index.php?wg_abbrev=oslc-corebut for open projects?
Not yet. Let me sort that out.  

4. The content of the Notices section needs to be finalized. Here's what we currently have

Copyright © OASIS Open 20189. All Rights Reserved.

All capitalized terms in the following text have the meanings assigned to them in the OASIS Intellectual Property Rights Policy (the "OASIS IPR Policy"). The full Policy may be found at the OASIS website.

This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published, and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this section are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, including by removing the copyright notice or references to OASIS, except as needed for the purpose of developing any document or deliverable produced by an OASIS Open Project (in which case the rules applicable to copyrights, as set forth in the OASIS IPR Policy, must be followed) or as required to translate it into languages other than English.

The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked by OASIS or its successors or assigns.

This document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS IS" basis and OASIS DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY OWNERSHIP RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

OASIS requests that any OASIS Party or any other party that believes it has patent claims that would necessarily be infringed by implementations of this OASIS Project Specification or OASIS Standard, to notify OASIS TCOpen Project (OP) Administrator and provide an indication of its willingness to grant patent licenses to such patent claims in a manner consistent with the IPR Mode licensing of the OASIS Open Project that produced this specification.

OASIS invites any party to contact the OASIS TC OP Administrator if it is aware of a claim of ownership of any patent claims that would necessarily be infringed by implementations of this specification by a patent holder that is not willing to provide a license to such patent claims in a manner consistent with the IPR Mode licensing of the OASIS Open Project that produced this specification. OASIS may include such claims on its website, but disclaims any obligation to do so.

OASIS takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on OASIS' procedures with respect to rights in any document or deliverable produced by an OASIS Open Project can be found on the OASIS website. Copies of claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this OASIS Project Specification or OASIS Standard, can be obtained from the OASIS TC OP Administrator. OASIS makes no representation that any information or list of intellectual property rights will at any time be complete, or that any claims in such list are, in fact, Essential Claims.

The name "OASIS" is a trademark of OASIS, the owner and developer of this specification, and should be used only to refer to the organization and its official outputs. OASIS welcomes reference to, and implementation and use of, specifications, while reserving the right to enforce its marks against misleading uses. Please see https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/trademark for above guidance.


5. Determine a process for publishing open project specifications on OASIS
  • Determine the URL pattern for the published specifications
Yes. Still TBD. 
  • Publish rendered specifications to OASIS
I'm not sure what you mean by 'publish' here. Hand them off to us to load and announce? 
I'm not sure of the import of this either. Are the resource shapes something different from the QM Spec?  

Anything else?

--
Jim Amsden, Senior Technical Staff Member
ELM Quality Manager
919-525-6575



--

/chet 
----------------
Chet Ensign
Chief Technical Community Steward
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society
http://www.oasis-open.org

Mobile: +1 201-341-1393 


--

/chet 
----------------
Chet Ensign
Chief Technical Community Steward
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society
http://www.oasis-open.org

Mobile: +1 201-341-1393