At 2007-03-28 12:22 +0900, MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) wrote:
>The OASIS RNG TC has two procedural problems: RELAX NG is NOT an OASIS
>standard, and the OASIS RELAX NG TC does not obey to the OASIS
>Liaison Policy,
>which imposes constraints on submitting OASIS specs to other
>standardization organizations.
>
>http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/liaison_policy.php
>
>I have contacted OASIS people about procedural and IPR issues but they
>do not respond.
I do believe the contribution of RELAX-NG to the ISO process predates
any existing OASIS policies on IPR, so any such discussion is probably moot.
>SC34 has had some discussions on the maintenance of RELAX NG in Oslo
>on 3/22.
>OASIS is a category-A liaison of SC34. This means that members of
>the RELAX NG TC
>can participate in SC34 meetings. Voting is different, since only P-members
>of SC34 are allowed to vote.
>
>To avoid the two procedural problems mentioned above, I think that the
>best way to go forward is:
>
>(1) SC34 the authoritative committee for the RNG specification,
>
>(2) members of the OASIS RNG TC paricipate in discussions
> by e-mail or F2F,
>
>(3) the OASIS RNG TC continues to make the OASIS committee specification
> identical to 19757-2,
>
>(4) the OASIS RNG TC maintains what has not been standardized by SC34.
> That is, RELAX NG Tutorial, Guidelines for using W3C XML
> Schema Datatypes with RELAX NG, and RELAX NG Compact Syntax
> (which is only partially standardized by SC34.)
>
>(5) the OASIS RNG TC can do promotion and education.
>
>How do people feel?
I'm very supportive of this stance, Makoto, thank you. I am anxious
to see how the RNG TC can contribute to the community acceptance of
this work. I do not see these supportive objectives above as being
under the purview of SC34, so the RNG TC seems to me to be the most
appropriate venue in which such important work can be performed. I'm
looking forward to the TC working towards these goals.
It also presents a clean division of work while, at the same time,
giving everyone the opportunity to contribute to all aspects as we
move forward.
>Some people feel that ISO/IEC is not important in
>the US, but I would argue that the ODF .vs. OOXML issue reminds me of
>ISO/IEC.
Good point!
. . . . . . . . . . . . Ken
--
World-wide corporate, govt. & user group XML, XSL and UBL training
RSS feeds: publicly-available developer resources and training
G. Ken Holman mailto:
Crane Softwrights Ltd. http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/
Box 266, Kars, Ontario CANADA K0A-2E0 +1(613)489-0999 (F:-0995)
Male Cancer Awareness Aug'05 http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/bc
Legal business disclaimers: http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal
