|
Re: Submit OSLC CM 2.1 for publishing as PSD03
Nope, you should see the spec with the intro. Please try disabling uBlock/Privacy Badger for the page:
-- –Andrew.
Från:
Axel Reichwein <axel.reichwein@...>
Thanks. |
|
|
|
Re: Submit OSLC CM 2.1 for publishing as PSD03
Thanks! I actually do see everything! Maybe I didn't look carefully the first time :)
|
|
|
|
What's next for publishing oslc-op specifications
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: [oslc-op] The PDB has approved to publish CM 3.0 PSD03
Thanks Jim! Yay, the first approved document by the PGB 🎉
A small correction: the ballot will request the PGB to promote PSD03 to PS03.
-- –Andrew.
Från:
<oslc-op@...> på uppdrag av Jim Amsden <jamsden@...>
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. |
|
|
|
The OSLC TCs and Member Section will close this Friday
Chet Ensign
The work of the OSLC Technical Committees and Member Section have transitioned successfully to the OASIS OSLC Open Project. The time has come to congratulate everyone on the progress made and close these groups. This is your notice that I will take the final actions to close the OSLC Core TC (https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/oslc-core/), OSLC Domains TC (https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/oslc-domains/), and the OSLC Member Section (http://www.oasis-oslc.org/)this coming Friday 23 August 2019. For information about the work of the OASIS OSLC (Open Services for Lifecycle Collaboration) Open Project, see the project's website at https://open-services.net/. Project work is underway on GitHub at https://github.com/oasis-open-projects. You can follow the project's mailing list at https://lists.oasis-open-projects.org/g/oslc-op or subscribe by sending a blank email message to oslc-op+subscribe@... The OSLC Core TC approved OSLC Core Version 3.0 as a Committee Specification on 04 April 2017. OSLC Query Version 3.0 is transferring to the OP and will be further developed as a Project Specification. The OSLC Domains TC approved OSLC Change Management Version 3.0 as a Committee Specification on 08 June 2018, OSLC Requirements Management Version 2.1 on 24 August 2018, and OSLC Architecture Management Specification 2.1 on 08 October 2018. As is OASIS policy, these and all other assets produced by the committees will remain freely and publicly available. Remember, the OSLC project team made the transition to the Open Project so that everybody can participate freely in the community and contribute to the project, with or without membership in OASIS. So whether through making contributions to the work, participating in project calls and discussions, contributing articles, and posts for the web site, etc., please make yourself part of this important initiative. Our congratulations to all, /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: [oslc-core] The OSLC TCs and Member Section will close this Friday
Hello,
I would like to thank everyone for their participation in the member section & StC and the tech committees!
The newly formed OSLC Open Project had a busy summer and the OSLC Project Governing Board just approved the first Project Specification Draft. The Change Management PSD (rev 3) is getting final formatting touches before publishing. The aims for the project this year:
* Publish a Candidate OASIS Standard for the Change Management 3.0 specification. * Develop a new reference implementation toolchain. * Publish Project Specification revisions for all specs that receive enough community attention.
If you want to follow the activity in the OSLC OP:
- Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/oslcnews/ - Sign up on our new forum and subscribe to the important announcements only: https://forum.open-services.net/c/oslc-op/announcements - Subscribe to the mailing list: https://lists.oasis-open-projects.org/g/oslc-op - Join our weekly telco: https://github.com/oslc-op/oslc-admin/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#online-meetings
Again, thanks for a great journey and see you in the new OSLC Open Project!
Cheers, Andrew, PGB co-chair of the OSLC Open Project
P.S. You don’t need to be an OASIS member to join, by the way! So don’t hesitate forwarding this to your colleagues ;)
Från:
OSLC Core TC <oslc-core@...> på uppdrag av Chet Ensign <chet.ensign@...>
The work of the OSLC Technical Committees and Member Section have transitioned successfully to the OASIS OSLC Open Project. The time has come to congratulate everyone on the progress made and close these groups. This is your notice that
I will take the final actions to close the OSLC Core TC (https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/oslc-core/), OSLC Domains TC (https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/oslc-domains/),
and the OSLC Member Section (http://www.oasis-oslc.org/)this coming Friday 23 August 2019.
Chet Ensign Chief Technical Community Steward
|
|
|
|
Re: Submit OSLC CM 2.1 for publishing as PSD03
The ballot has passed. Vote tally is available under https://lists.oasis-open-projects.org/g/oslc-op-pgb/responses?pollid=6453 (screenshot attached) Cheers, Andrew 
|
|
|
|
Re: Incorporating open-services.net site maintenance into oslc-op
#poll
The ballot has passed, 2 valid votes in favour, 0 against. Vote tally is available under https://lists.oasis-open-projects.org/g/oslc-op-pgb/responses?pollid=6266 (screenshot attached). Cheers, Andrew 
|
|
|
|
[oslc-op] Your PSD03 for OSLC Change Management v3.0 is now available
Chet Ensign
A bit of news to wrap up your week: our first official publication from an OASIS Open Project is published: OSLC Change Management Version 3.0 Project Specification Draft 03 (continuing the numbering from the TC's existing publications). See Paul's announcement below. We walked our way through many tweaks and trials and errors and, with Paul's focused work with Jim, Andrew, and Nick, we got most of it right! This is the first of many the OP will produce and I expect this will be advanced for public review before the end of the year. You'll also note that this is the first publication in the dedicated server for OPs: docs.oasis-open-projects.org. Thanks to Paul, Jim, Nick, and Andrew for working through this first publication. We learned a lot and I'm looking forward to documenting the process for the next ones up. Best, /chet ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Paul Knight <paul.knight@...> Date: Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 4:25 PM Subject: [oslc-op] Your PSD03 for OSLC Change Management v3.0 is now available To: <oslc-op@...> Members of the OSLC OP,
Your request to publish OSLC Change Management v3.0 PSD03 is complete. You can access the files at: OSLC Change Management Version 3.0 Project Specification Draft 03 15 August 2019 OSLC Change Management Version 3.0. Part 1: Specification https://docs.oasis-open-projects.org/oslc-op/cm/v3.0/psd03/change-mgt-spec.html https://docs.oasis-open-projects.org/oslc-op/cm/v3.0/psd03/change-mgt-spec.pdf OSLC Change Management Version 3.0. Part 2: Vocabulary https://docs.oasis-open-projects.org/oslc-op/cm/v3.0/psd03/change-mgt-vocab.html https://docs.oasis-open-projects.org/oslc-op/cm/v3.0/psd03/change-mgt-vocab.pdf Turtle files: https://docs.oasis-open-projects.org/oslc-op/cm/v3.0/psd03/change-mgt-shapes.ttl https://docs.oasis-open-projects.org/oslc-op/cm/v3.0/psd03/change-mgt-vocab.ttl Please let us know if we can help further. Best regards, Paul -- OASIS - Advancing open standards for the information society /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: [oslc-op] Your PSD03 for OSLC Change Management v3.0 is now available
Hello,
It’s indeed a great first milestone. Thanks a lot to everyone from the OP and OASIS for making it happen!
The release on Github is published under https://github.com/oslc-op/oslc-specs/releases/tag/cm-v3.0-psd03; https://github.com/oslc-op/oslc-admin/issues/25 is closed.
We are looking forward to publishing the OSLC RM 2.1 PSD02 as the next PS draft.
-- –Andrew.
Från:
<oslc-op-pgb@...> på uppdrag av Chet Ensign <chet.ensign@...>
A bit of news to wrap up your week: our first official publication from an OASIS Open Project is published: OSLC Change Management Version 3.0 Project Specification Draft 03 (continuing the numbering from the TC's existing publications). See Paul's announcement below. We walked our way through many tweaks and trials and errors and, with Paul's focused work with Jim, Andrew, and Nick, we got most of it right!
This is the first of many the OP will produce and I expect this will be advanced for public review before the end of the year. You'll also note that this is the first publication in the dedicated server for OPs: docs.oasis-open-projects.org.
Thanks to Paul, Jim, Nick, and Andrew for working through this first publication. We learned a lot and I'm looking forward to documenting the process for the next ones up.
Best,
/chet
---------- Forwarded message ---------
Members of the OSLC OP,
Your request to publish OSLC Change Management v3.0 PSD03 is complete. You can access the files at: Paul Knight....Document Process Analyst...mobile: +1 781-883-1783 OASIS - Advancing open standards for the information society
--
Chet Ensign Chief Technical Community Steward
|
|
|
|
RM v2.1 PSD02 ready
Hello,
The “pre-PSD” can be found under https://github.com/oslc-op/oslc-specs/releases/tag/untagged-40b8102c05f3fa132447. It contains the ZIP file with the resources to be published.
If there are no big comments, I will open the PGB vote. Chet, Paul, do you think we could have an OASIS review finished in the 14 days for the vote, please?
-- –Andrew. |
|
|
|
Re: RM v2.1 PSD02 ready
Chet Ensign
Thanks Andrew. I opened https://github.com/oasis-open-projects/administration/issues/5 to track this. Paul, can you review the package and share any feedback? Thx, /chet On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 12:44 PM Andrii Berezovskyi <andriib@...> wrote:
--
/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 |
|
|
|
Ballot for the publication of the OSLC RM 2.1 PSD02
#poll
Do the PGB members approve publishing OSLC RM 2.1 as the Project Specification Draft 02? The vote opens immediately and will close on September 23, 2019. Details of the release are provided in https://github.com/oslc-op/oslc-specs/pull/230, including the link to the ZIP archive. |
|
|
|
Formal notice of intent to publish Project Specification Drafts
Dear PGB members,
The rules require us to notify you at least 14 days before submitting the ballots for the spec drafts publication as you have seen from Chet’s email I just forwarded to the list.
We are hereby notifying you of the OP intention to publish OSLC Core 3.0 PSD 04 and OSLC QM 2.1 PSD 02 in 2 weeks’ time.
The specs’ working drafts can be found here:
The PSD preparation work is tracked in the following issues where you can leave comments at any time:
Cheers, Andrew |
|
|
|
Re: Ballot for the publication of the OSLC RM 2.1 PSD02
#poll
Thanks Chet.
The PGB ballot for publishing the RM 2.1 PSD02 will stay up till October 1 to comply with the rules.
-- –Andrew.
Från:
Chet Ensign <chet.ensign@...>
Hmm. Rules need some clearing up. Here's what I see in the rules:
"10.3 Electronic ballots of the PGB, when required by these rules, must be conducted on facilities provided or approved by OASIS, and must remain open for a minimum period for seven days. The Chair(s) may specify a longer voting period for a particular electronic ballot. Eligible voters may change their vote up until the end of the voting period."
"13.3 Project Specification Drafts. A PGB having at least Project Approval Minimum Membership may act to approve any set of contributions to the Project, including from its Releases or Group Releases, as an official Project Specification Draft, after giving written notice to all Contributors via the Project Tools at least fourteen days prior to taking that action (by initiating a PGB vote or consensus call). Such approval decisions are subject to the process, notice and transparency provisions of these rules."
So the ballot must remain open for at least 7 days. The 14 day issue is about the written notice prior to the vote. So if there was an entry on an issue or an email saying "we plan to approve XXX as a PSD" and that happened 14 or more days ago then that requirement is met and the ballot only has to be open 7 days. But if the ballot itself was the first written notice anybody had that this was going to happen, then it has to stay open - well actually, because the rule reads "prior to..." then 21 days - 14 for the written notice and 7 more for the ballot.
I suspect you have earlier communications that the work is going to be moved to approval - I seem to remember some exchanges earlier, right?
/chet
On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 9:50 AM Andrii Berezovskyi <andriib@...> wrote:
--
Chet Ensign Chief Technical Community Steward
|
|
|
|
Re: RM v2.1 PSD02 ready
Hello Paul,
Did you have a chance to review the PSD for the Requirement Management spec? Thank you in advance.
-- –Andrew.
Från:
Chet Ensign <chet.ensign@...>
Thanks Andrew. I opened https://github.com/oasis-open-projects/administration/issues/5 to track this.
Paul, can you review the package and share any feedback?
Thx,
/chet
On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 12:44 PM Andrii Berezovskyi <andriib@...> wrote:
--
Chet Ensign Chief Technical Community Steward
|
|
|
|
Re: RM v2.1 PSD02 ready
Thanks Paul,
- the link to the OASIS Open Projects log was malformed, missing the initial "https:" in the link https://docs.oasis-open-projects.org/templates/logo/open-projects-logo.png
This is actually a feature, not a bug! It instructs the browser to fetch the image via the same protocol as the page itself.
- the links to the "Previous stage" should use http instead of https in this case, since the earlier files were installed with http links. When the HTML is retrieved using https, it is unable to load the associated .css file, so the document is poorly presented.
Fill fix. By the way, if you change the CSS URIs to be like the “malformed” URI I used, the mixed-content problems will go away 😉
- (editorial) - in Part 2: Vocabulary, I would expect that the first two definition blocks under Section 2.1.2 (Requirement and RequirementCollection) should be placed under 2.1.1, since they are Classes rather than Properties.
Makes sense. Will fix in ReSpec 2.1.11.
-- –Andrew.
Från:
Paul Knight <paul.knight@...>
Replying to all here, although this may not make it to all the lists...
I reviewed the two HTML files in the ZIP file rm-2.1-psd02_20190910.zip.
These both look good. I only noted a couple of items, plus an editorial comment:
- the link to the OASIS Open Projects log was malformed, missing the initial "https:" in the link https://docs.oasis-open-projects.org/templates/logo/open-projects-logo.png
- the links to the "Previous stage" should use http instead of https in this case, since the earlier files were installed with http links. When the HTML is retrieved using https, it is unable to load the associated .css file, so the document is poorly presented.
- (editorial) - in Part 2: Vocabulary, I would expect that the first two definition blocks under Section 2.1.2 (Requirement and RequirementCollection) should be placed under 2.1.1, since they are Classes rather than Properties.
Again, these look very good - it looks like you have gotten your Respec process set up nicely to prepare the OSLC files very quickly after the group approves them.
Best regards, Paul
On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 3:56 PM Andrii Berezovskyi <andriib@...> wrote:
-- Paul Knight....Document Process Analyst...mobile: +1 781-883-1783 OASIS - Advancing open standards for the information society |
|
|
|
Re: RM v2.1 PSD02 ready
Actually, the // trick is no longer needed: https://www.paulirish.com/2010/the-protocol-relative-url/, will fix
The vocabulary grouping fix is proposed under https://github.com/oasis-tcs/tab-respec/issues/17
-- –Andrew.
Från:
<oslc-op-pgb@...> på uppdrag av Andrii Berezovskyi <andriib@...>
Thanks Paul,
- the link to the OASIS Open Projects log was malformed, missing the initial "https:" in the link https://docs.oasis-open-projects.org/templates/logo/open-projects-logo.png
This is actually a feature, not a bug! It instructs the browser to fetch the image via the same protocol as the page itself.
- the links to the "Previous stage" should use http instead of https in this case, since the earlier files were installed with http links. When the HTML is retrieved using https, it is unable to load the associated .css file, so the document is poorly presented.
Fill fix. By the way, if you change the CSS URIs to be like the “malformed” URI I used, the mixed-content problems will go away 😉
- (editorial) - in Part 2: Vocabulary, I would expect that the first two definition blocks under Section 2.1.2 (Requirement and RequirementCollection) should be placed under 2.1.1, since they are Classes rather than Properties.
Makes sense. Will fix in ReSpec 2.1.11.
-- –Andrew.
Från:
Paul Knight <paul.knight@...>
Replying to all here, although this may not make it to all the lists...
I reviewed the two HTML files in the ZIP file rm-2.1-psd02_20190910.zip.
These both look good. I only noted a couple of items, plus an editorial comment:
- the link to the OASIS Open Projects log was malformed, missing the initial "https:" in the link https://docs.oasis-open-projects.org/templates/logo/open-projects-logo.png
- the links to the "Previous stage" should use http instead of https in this case, since the earlier files were installed with http links. When the HTML is retrieved using https, it is unable to load the associated .css file, so the document is poorly presented.
- (editorial) - in Part 2: Vocabulary, I would expect that the first two definition blocks under Section 2.1.2 (Requirement and RequirementCollection) should be placed under 2.1.1, since they are Classes rather than Properties.
Again, these look very good - it looks like you have gotten your Respec process set up nicely to prepare the OSLC files very quickly after the group approves them.
Best regards, Paul
On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 3:56 PM Andrii Berezovskyi <andriib@...> wrote:
-- Paul Knight....Document Process Analyst...mobile: +1 781-883-1783 OASIS - Advancing open standards for the information society |
|
|
|
RM PSD publication
Hello,
Did you have a chance to see Jad’s updates to address your feedback?
--
Andrew
|
|
|
|
Re: Ballot for the publication of the OSLC RM 2.1 PSD02
#poll
The ballot has concluded successfully. Vote tally attached. 
|
|
|
