Oasis product Life Cycle Support Technical Committee Meeting 48

1. 
   Welcome by Chair
   

• 
  Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting
  

2. 
   Roll call
   

• 
  See attendance_plcs_Mtg48_2009-11-25.xls
  
• 
  The meeting did not achieve a quorum
  

3. 
   Report of Technical Oversight Group (Tor Arne Irgens)
   

• 
  Report of TOG telecons set for 14 October
  

• 
  Not much has happened since last meeting
  
• 
  Engaged with French Ministry of Defence who has shown some interest in PLCS
  

4. 
   Report on second phase (Howard Mason)
   

• 
  Review of resource commitments
  

Action item 46/2: Provide inputs and estimates for the resource spreadsheet including resolution of ballot comments, additional one-off costs, development of reference data, capabilities, and templates, and any additional items for completion of core Tasks (CORE Team)

Resource spreadsheet can be found at http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/plcs/download.php/34634/TC%20core%20activities%20with%20time%20and%20costs_Rev2_2009-10-12.xls

Action item 47/1: Finish TC core activities with time and costs spreadsheet to include DEX development costs (Chris Kreiler / Rob Bodington)

Members were invited to report on any new resources that can be applied to the core project, and to the completion of the first OASIS DEXs, and also to indicate any other DEX developments that were mature enough to begin to plan publication.

• 
  Action item 47/1 still pends. Rob Bodington and Chris Kreiler agreed to finish the spreadsheet by mid-December (2009-12-15)
  
• 
  ASD may have their DEXs ready; DEX1AD (Product breakdown for support) and DEX3AD (Task)
  
• 
  S3000L version 1 will be published in Feb/Mar 2010 time frame, underpinned by the two ASD DEXes
  
• 
  Leif Gyllstrom reported that DEX 3AD being updated from ASD ballot comments
  
• 
  DEX3AD is true business DEX of PLCS TC DEX 3
  
• 
  Contract awarded by UK MoD to LSC to complete Task DEX - forecast end of February
  
• 
  Updated all reference data needed by Task DEX, but has not been introduced into DEX3AD yet
  
• 
  DEXs will be subject to committee Full Majority Vote to release and go through an OASIS public comment period. (see Annex with reminder of required procedure) This could include ASD DEXs if they are to be published as OASIS standards.
  
• 
  Concluded that it should be viable to circulate a new ballot in the March 2010 timeframe.
  

Action item 48/1: Explore opportunity for ASD DEXes to be published by OASIS and referenced from S3000L (Leif Gyllstrom)

• 
  Implementer’s Forum
  

Jim Colson to report on progress with revised proposal

• 
  No progress on Action item 37/2.
  

• 
  New DEX proposals (Standing Action item 37/5)
  

• 
  French MOD enthusiastic about PLCS and DEXs. French also participating in ASD Strategic Group.
  

• 
  TDP proposal update (N.Figay)
  

• 
  Still trying to secure funding
  
• 
  Proposal to converge STEP AP 214ed3 with AP 203ed2 into AP 242, which would provide the necessary functionality
  

5. 
   Ballot comment resolution of first DEX package (Jim Colson)
   

• 
  Aviation Maintenance DEX
  
• 
  Task DEX
  

• 
  LOGSA starting to resolve some of the Ballot DEX Release 1 comments. Hope to finish by the end of the calendar year
  
• 
  Scot Motquin was invited to work with other CORE Team members (Trine Hansen, Rob Bodington, and Leif Gyllstrom)
  

6. 
   Reference data (Mats Nilsson)
   

• 
  Report of activities on PLCS Reference Data
  

• 
  Nothing to report. No activities since last meeting, apart from those reported already.
  

7. 
   AP239 ed 2 (Phil Rutland / Rob Bodington)
   

• 
  Report of activities on PLCS AP 239 ed 2
  
• 
  Resources for supporting the ballot/resolution activities
  

• 
  Dispositioned all outstanding issues at the SC 4 Rotterdam meeting (2009-11-08/13)
  
• 
  Developed solutions. Will include Risk modules and only do editorial changes
  
• 
  UK MOD only funding administration work
  
• 
  Not getting
  
  • 
    AP214 variant and configuration management
    
  • 
    Development of test data suite - role for Implementor’s Forum
    
  • 
    Simpler deployment of PLCS through an implementation schema
    
• 
  Will submit for DIS ballot after changes made (Christmas timeframe 2009)
  
• 
  TC has three month window to get everything into DEXs
  

8. 
   PLCS Web Services Report (Rob Bodington)
   

Action item 27/4: Establish contact with OASIS Web Services TC and make PLCS Web Services visible within OASIS (Howard Mason, Rob Bodington, and Nigel Shaw)

Action item 27/5: Review and comment on the level of granularity for PLCS Web Services (All)

Action item 27/6: Determine publication method for PLCS Web Services (Chair, Rob Bodington)

Action item 42/2: Check on next release date for PLCS Web Services (Nigel Shaw)

• 
  No update on PLCS Web Services
  
• 
  SC 4 looking at how it can apply newer technology, i.e., OWL, to extract SC 4 data models. Developing white paper over the next few months. Aim is to end up with single set of modular web services to support SC 4 modules
  

9. 
   Feedback from Implementations
   

Members are invited to present recent pilot activities.

• 
  Feedback on PLCS success stories.
  
• 
  Tangible business benefits.
  
• 
  Issues and requirements
  

• 
  Norwegian Deployment
  

• 
  JOTNE completed implementation of data document DEX application
  
• 
  Final delivery of ISS data, a combination of OASIS DEX 1 and DEX 11.
  
• 
  Willing to share requirements for DEX 1 changes
  

• 
  Swedish activities
  

• 
  Mats Nilsson on parental leave for first half of 2010. FMV will find replacement so they will not be absent
  

• 
  UKMoD LCIA and CBIS
  

• 
  No report
  

• 
  LOGSA
  

• 
  Resolving S3000L comments
  
• 
  Working with GEIA on standards (0007)
  

• 
  AIA Engineering Data Interoperability Project
  

• 
  Set of standards needed to support long term data retention
  
• 
  Clear statement from both sides for modular standards based approach in conjunction with LOTAR EN/NAS 9300 series
  

• 
  ASD - AeroSpace and Defence Industries Association of Europe
  

• 
  Eurostep working with Airbus using PLCS and AP233 to do conceptual design
  

10. 
    Promotional activities
    

• 
  Outreach
  
  • 
    Future events
    

• 
  2010-01-19/20 NATO Lifecycle Management
  
• 
  2010-05-16/21* (tbc) SC 4 Plenary Meeting, Bethlehem, PA, USA
  

• 
  Recent past events
  
  • 
    2009-11-08/13 SC 4 58th Plenary meeting in Rotterdam
    
  • 
    2009-11-18/19 PDT Europe
    

• 
  PDT Europe very successful. U.S. Navy, Australia, and Europe representatives attended
  
• 
  Thales pushing PLCS and deploying internally
  
• 
  Gartner Group pushing standards and PLCS
  

• 
  www.et.gov - (waiting DEX availability)
  

Action 22/12: Recheck to see if posting material and a link to the PLCS ePortal would be beneficial. (Nigel Shaw)

• 
  No report
  

• 
  “Presentations and General Information” folder
  

• 
  Marketing Links
  

• 
  No report
  

11. 
    Liaisons
    

• 
  SC4 (Tim King)
  

• 
  Delete Action 37/7. Not going anywhere
  

• 
  Other OASIS TCs
  
  • 
    Codelist (Nigel Shaw)
    

• 
  No report
  

• 
  ASD (Carl Wilen/Howard Mason)
  

• 
  No report
  

• 
  POSC/CAESAR (Nils Sandsmark)
  

• 
  No report
  

• 
  GEIA (Jim Colson)
  

• 
  No report
  

• 
  Life Cycle Information Management AC/327 (Tor Arne Irgens)
  

• 
  No report
  

• 
  MoU between PLCS, SCORM, and S1000D
  

• 
  No report
  

12. 
    OASIS Administration
    

• 
  Web site
  

• 
  No report
  

13. 
    Future meeting schedule, hosts
    

• 
  2010-01-21 (Thursday) at 1600 CET, 1500 UK, 1500 GMT, 1000 US Eastern, and 0700 US Pacific Time
  

14. 
    Any Other Business
    

• 
  No other business
  

15. 
    Open Action Items
    

Section 3. Standards Approval Process

The TC may at any stage during development of a specification approve the specification as a Committee Draft. The approval of a Committee Draft shall require a Full Majority Vote of the TC. The TC may approve a specification, revise it, and re-approve it any number of times as a Committee Draft.

Before the TC can approve its Committee Draft as a Committee Specification the TC must conduct a public review of the work. The decision by the TC to submit the specification for public review requires a Full Majority Vote, and must be accompanied by a recommendation from the TC of external stakeholders who should be notified of the review. The Committee Draft approved to go to review shall be called a Public Review Draft. The public review must be announced by the TC Administrator to the OASIS Membership list and optionally on other public mail lists; the TC Administrator shall at the same time issue a call for IPR disclosure.

Comments from non-TC Members must be collected via the TC’s archived public comment facility; comments made through any other means shall not be accepted. The TC must acknowledge the receipt of each comment, track the comments received, and publish to its primary e-mail list the disposition of each comment at the end of the review period.

No changes may be made to the Public Review Draft during a review. If changes are required the specification must be withdrawn from review then resubmitted.

The TC may conduct any number of review cycles (i.e. approval to send a Committee Draft to Public Review, collecting comments, making edits to the specification, etc.). The first public review of a specification must take place for a minimum of 60 days, and any subsequent reviews must be held for a minimum of 15 days. Changes made to a specification after a review must be clearly identified in any subsequent review, and the subsequent review shall be limited in scope to changes made in the previous review. Before starting another review cycle the specification must be re-approved as a Committee Draft and then approved to go to public review by the TC.

If Substantive Changes are made to the specification after the public review, whether as a result of public review comments or from TC Member input, then the TC must conduct another review cycle. The specification may not be considered for approval by the TC as a Committee Specification until it has undergone a review cycle during which it has received no comments that result in Substantive Changes to the specification.

3.3 Approval of a Committee Specification

After the public review of a Public Review Draft the TC may approve the specification as a Committee Specification. If any comments have been received during the most recent Public Review period, that vote may not commence any earlier than 7 days after the last day of that Public Review. The approval of a Committee Specification shall require a Special Majority Vote. The TC Chair shall notify the TC Administrator that the TC is ready to vote on the approval of the specification, and provide to the TC Administrator the location of the editable versions of the specification files. The TC Administrator shall set up and conduct the ballot to approve the Committee Specification.

3.4 Approval of an OASIS Standard

Simultaneously with the approval of a Committee Specification or at a later date, and after three Statements of Use have been presented to the TC, a TC may resolve by Special Majority Vote to submit the Committee Specification to the Membership of OASIS for consideration as an OASIS Standard. Upon resolution of the TC to submit the specification, its Chair shall submit the following items to the TC Administrator:

(a) Links to the approved Committee Specification in the TC’s document repository, and any appropriate supplemental documentation for the specification, both of which must be written using the OASIS templates. The specification may not have been changed between its approval as a Committee Specification and its submission to OASIS for consideration as an OASIS Standard, except for the changes on the title page and running footer noting the approval status and date.

(b) The editable version of all files that are part of the Committee Specification;

(c) Certification by the TC that all schema and XML instances included in the specification, whether by inclusion or reference, including fragments of such, are well formed, and that all expressions are valid;

(d) A clear English-language summary of the specification;

(e) A statement regarding the relationship of this specification to similar work of other OASIS TCs or other standards developing organizations;

(f) The Statements of Use presented above;

(g) The beginning and ending dates of the public review(s), a pointer to the announcement of the public review(s), and a pointer to an account of each of the comments/issues raised during the public review period(s), along with its resolution;

(h) An account of and results of the voting to approve the specification as a Committee Specification, including the date of the ballot and a pointer to the ballot;

(i) An account of or pointer to votes and comments received in any earlier attempts to standardize substantially the same specification, together with the originating TC’s response to each comment;

(j) A pointer to the publicly visible comments archive for the originating TC;

(k) A pointer to any minority reports delivered by one or more Members who did not vote in favor of approving the Committee Specification, which report may include statements regarding why the member voted against the specification or that the member believes that Substantive Changes were made which have not gone through public review; or certification by the Chair that no minority reports exist.

The above submission must be made by the 15th of any month to the TC Administrator, who shall have until the end of the month to complete administrative processing and checking for completeness and correctness of the submission. If the submission is incomplete it shall be rejected but may be resubmitted at a later time.

The TC that originated the specification may resolve by Special Majority Vote to withdraw the proposed specification at any point after it is submitted to the TC Administrator for administrative processing and before the start of the voting period. No part of the submission may be changed or altered in any way after being submitted to the TC Administrator, including by Errata or corrigenda. Errata, corrigenda or other changes to a Committee Specification are not permitted after its submission for OASIS Standard approval; if changes are required the Committee Specification must be withdrawn by the TC, edited, re-approved as a Committee Specification, and then may be resubmitted as a proposed OASIS Standard. Proposed changes of any kind to a Committee Draft or Committee Specification may be maintained by a Technical Committee, but do not have any approval status until incorporated into a revised Committee Draft or Committee Specification.

The TC Administrator shall submit the proposal to the OASIS Membership by the first day of the following month. The first 15 days of that month shall be used by the membership to familiarize themselves with the submission. Voting shall start on the 16th of the month. The voting representatives of those OASIS Organizational Members who were members at the beginning of the familiarization period are eligible to vote, and must cast their ballots by the end of the month.

In votes upon proposed OASIS Standards, each OASIS Organizational Member shall be entitled to cast one vote. Votes shall be cast via the publicly archived electronic voting facility supplied by OASIS. Ballots shall be publicly visible during voting and may be changed up until the end of the voting period. The results of a vote on a proposed standard shall be provided to the membership and to the TC no later than seven days following the close of the voting period.

If at the end of the voting period at least 15 percent of the voting OASIS Membership has voted to approve the proposed standard, and if no votes have been cast to disapprove the proposed standard, it shall become an OASIS Standard immediately following the end of the voting period. If negative votes have been cast amounting to 25 percent or more of the votes cast, or if less than 15 percent of the voting OASIS Membership has cast positive votes to approve the proposed standard, the ballot is deemed to have failed and the submission fails.

However, if negative votes are cast amounting to less than 25 percent of the votes that have been cast, the TC shall be notified of the negative votes, after which the TC shall have 30 days to take one of the following actions by Resolution of a Special Majority Vote: (a) request the TC Administrator to approve the specification as submitted despite the negative votes; (b) withdraw the submission entirely; or (c) submit an amended specification, in which case the amended submission shall be considered as if it were a new submission, except that information regarding previous votes and any disposition of comments received in previous votes shall accompany the amended submission. If the originating TC upon notification of negative votes takes no formal action within the 30 days allocated for consideration of the results, then the specification shall not become an OASIS Standard.

Failure of a ballot for any reason shall not prevent a later version of the same specification from being submitted again as specified in this section.

3.5 Approved Errata

A TC may approve a set of Errata to an OASIS Standard as "Approved Errata" to the corrected specification by:

(a) Adopting the set of proposed corrections as a Committee Draft, in the form of a list of changes, and optionally accompanied by a copy of the original specification text marked to incorporate the proposed changes.

(b) Confirming by Full Majority Vote that the proposed corrections do not constitute a Substantive Change.

(c) Submitting the proposed corrections for a 15-day public review, and completing that review, pursuant to Section 3.2.

(d) After the public review, confirming the proposed corrections as Approved Errata by a Full Majority Vote.

Once approved, the Approved Errata shall be with the specification it corrects, in any publication of that specification. Disposition of Approved Errata must be identified in the subsequent Public Review Draft of the corrected specification.

A TC may not adopt Approved Errata to an OASIS Standard more than once in any consecutive six-month period.