[wg11] Re: Part 28 in Seattle?

[Ed Barkmeyer]

Dave Loffredo wrote:

> I have not yet heard from anyone regarding this ...
> 
> 					   - Dave
> 
> ------------------------------
>>From loffredo Fri Sep 03 13:33:57 -0400 2004
> From: Dave Loffredo <loffredo at steptools.com>
> To: edbark at nist.gov
> CC: hpreston at ebmail.gdeb.com, staub at pdtec.de,
> 	david.price at eurostep.com, Jochen.Haenisch at epmtech.jotne.com,
> 	Masaru.Suzuki at unisys.co.jp, abf at cme.nist.gov,
> 	hardwick at steptools.com, bgischne at ebmail.gdeb.com
> ...
> Ed> I expect that Heidi et al. will have posted a "proposed DIS" of
> Ed> Part 28 to the server by 15 September, after which Heidi will be
> Ed> taking a rewarding leave of absence.  I would suggest we
> Ed> (i.e. you) schedule some official "WG11 review" of that draft in
> Ed> Seattle, prior to releasing that document, or its immediate
> Ed> successor, to DIS-FDIS ballot.
> 
> Hi Ed, I am certainly happy to schedule any meeting or review session
> that the Part 28 team would like to hold.  What day/time is best and
> who will be leading the review?

1) Because of funding limitations and other commitments, NIST can 
provide no further resources for the development of Part 28 after 15 
October 2004.

2) After discussion with Heidi, I now believe it is unlikely that a 
complete DIS draft, incorporating text for all agreed-on ballot comment 
resolutions, will be available before she goes on maternity leave.

3) It is desirable that an interim editor be appointed.  If no interim 
editor is appointed, it is likely that Part 28 v2 will go into limbo, 
awaiting commitment of resources to complete the DIS.

4) If a number of the NB representatives will be present in Seattle, it 
would be useful to schedule a session to ensure that the proposed 
resolutions are satisfactory, and possibly to develop/repair explicit 
text for them.  Heidi referred to this as a "continuation of the Groton 
Editing meeting".

5) If a number of the NB representatives will be present in Seattle, and 
believe such a meeting worthwhile, I would be willing to chair that 
meeting.  If, however, an interim editor is appointed, s/he may better 
chair such a meeting.

6) If, on the other hand, Japan, Norway, Sweden, and the United Kingdom 
(the NBs who commented on the CD) would not be represented at such a 
meeting, it would be reduced to a working session of such technical 
experts as may be present, and it is not clear that that has much value.

4 hours on any of the days is acceptable to NIST.  (If there is need for 
additional technical discussion, we will find a time and place to 
continue.)  I prefer that the meeting not conflict with the Part 25 v2 
session.

Related topic, in expectaion of imminent change of the guard:

For the plenary, I recommend that SC4 WG11 acknowledge Electric Boat's 
unflagging commitment of resources, both technical and editorial, to the 
development of an XML representation standard for the standard exchange 
schemas developed in SC4, and specifically acknowledge the personal 
contribution of Heidi Preston to this effort, as Editor of Part 28 v2, 
whose only reason for abandoning us now is that she has truly more 
important commitments!

If I am in Seattle at the appropriate time, I would be happy to make 
this motion in person.  But if not, I would be grateful to the Convenor 
if he could find a willing participant to do so in my stead.

-Ed

-- 
Edward J. Barkmeyer                        Email: edbark at nist.gov
National Institute of Standards & Technology
Manufacturing Systems Integration Division
100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8264                Tel: +1 301-975-3528
Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8264                FAX: +1 301-975-4694