← Prev in month
← Prev in thread
ebCore Agreement Update CS Special Majority Vote
Dear all,
I would like to follow up on the Agreement Update specification and
on the email below.
The TC agreed to the three steps outlined in the email in the
following TC Ballot:
https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ballot.php?id=2934
As requested, OASIS issued a second Public Review:
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ebcore/201607/msg00000.html
As evidenced by the comment list and the TC mailing list, no
comments have been submitted for this Public Review:
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ebcore-comment/
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ebcore/
This means that we can now take the final step. In our Ballot we
resolved to request a Special Majority Vote for the advancement of
the draft as a Committee Specification, in accordance with the
OASIS TC Process:
https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/tc-process#committeeSpec
To avoid having the vote in the midst of the (Northern Hemisphere)
summer holiday period, I've waited some time so that all voting
members have the opportunity to participate. As we are now close to
September, I intend to contact TC Admin and initiate the vote
soon. Please let me know if you have any issues with this timing
or any other concerns.
The TC currently has 8 voting members. The list is here:
https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/membership.php?wg_abbrev=ebcore
Erlend Klakegg Bergheim
Difi-Agency for Public Management and
eGovernment
Voting Member
Torsten Kirschner
Directorate of Labour and Welfare
Norway
Voting Member
Theo Kramer
Flame Computing Enterprises cc
Voting Member
Sander Fieten
Individual
Chair
FARRUKH NAJMI
Individual
Voting Member
Albert Kappe
Justitiele Informatiedienst
Voting Member
Pim van der Eijk
Sonnenglanz Consulting
Chair
Ernst Jan van Nigtevecht
Sonnenglanz Consulting
Voting Member
If you are listed as a voting member but don't want to vote, you
can change your member status to Observer. The approval needs at
least 2/3 (two thirds) of the Voting Members to vote "yes" and no
more than 1/4 (one fourth) of the Voting Members to vote "no".
Kind Regards,
Pim van der Eijk
On 29-03-16 09:00, Pim van der Eijk
wrote:
Dear all,
I have not received any comments on WD11 in the past three
weeks. WD11 had minor changes compared to WD10, which was
uploaded six weeks ago and incorporated updates relating to
feedback from the first Public Review. So my conclusion is that
you as TC have no further comments on this specification at this
stage.
If you agree, my proposal is therefore to re-approve WD11 as
CSD. Since some of the changes were material, the OASIS
process requires us to have a new public review, for a minimum
of 15 days. A second public review in the OASIS process shall
be limited in scope to changes made since the previous
review. After that, if there are no further comments to
address, we can wrap up this deliverable, as there are no known
requests for changes or enhancements, by approving it as CS.
To keep things simple for you as TC members, I intend to
combine these three actions for you as TC members (CSD approval
of WD11, 2nd PR for this CSD, initiate CS vote if no comments
during second PR) in one vote, for which I will set up an
electronic ballot early next month. Please let me know if you
have any questions or comments on this.
Kind Regards,
Pim
P.S. If there are comments in the second PR, we obviously need
to discuss how to handle them after the review period closes. If
the comments are such that further non-material changes are
needed, then we cannot upgrade CSD2-PRD2 to CS directly but
need to go through (a) new WD(s) and a CSD3 first. But as there
were few comments in the first review and the changes are
minor, I don't expect much feedback ...).
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject:
[ebcore] Groups - ebcore-au-v1.0-wd11 uploaded
Date:
Sat, 5 Mar 2016 06:19:24 -0800 (PST)
From:
Pim van der Eijk <>
To:
Submitter's message
Hi,
I got input from W3C to resolve the remaining issue with the XML
Signature Schema driver, and made some additional (mostly
editorial) fixes. Details below. I accepted all tracked changes
for wd10 (PR comments) before making the additional changes, so
the wd10 and wd11 together reflect the updates to the CSPRD.
One small functional change is a new optional Reason element, to
encode the reason an update is requested.
Could you all please send any final comments in the next
two/three weeks? I would like to start a new CSD vote around the
end of the month.
If the CSD is approved, do you think a new PR would be needed
before a CS vote? If we do, we could have one combined TC vote
for CSD, new PR, and starting a new vote if no new comments in
second PR.
From the change log:
Review comments EJVN processed.
In section 2.1, added a general statement about third parties.
Other editorial clarifications / improvements.
Other:
Editorial fixes.
Reference to and explanation for xmldsig1-schema.xsd added.
In the package, added updated xmldsig1-schema.xsd with embedded
comments.
Added OASIS copyright notice to AU and CU schemas.
Updated CPA3 link to latest draft.
In ebMS bindings, Agreement Termination may be a separate
Service.
New optional Reason in Update Request.
-- Mr. Pim van der Eijk
Document Name:
ebcore-au-v1.0-wd11
Description
The ebCore Agreement Update specification defines
message exchanges and an
XML schema to support the exchange of messaging service
communication
agreement update requests and the associated responses
to such requests.
The schema offers extensibility for various types of
updates. The main
initial application of the specification is the exchange
of X.509
certificates for certificate rollover, for which a
separate extension
schema is provided. The specification is based on the
concept of messaging
service communication agreements and the creation of new
agreements as
independently identified updated copies of existing
agreements. The
specification also provides an Agreement Termination
feature. The
specification supports ebMS2, ebMS3 and AS4 but can also
be used with other
protocols that have a concept of communication
agreement. The specification
is independent of storage or interchange formats for
configuration
information.
Download
Latest Revision
Public
Download Link
Submitter:
Mr. Pim van der Eijk
Group: OASIS ebXML Core (ebCore) TC
Folder: Contributions
Date submitted: 2016-03-05 06:18:38
Revision: 10
← Prev in month
← Prev in thread