[sc34wg3] Re: WG3 Atlanta recommendations (draft)

[Steve Pepper]

Hi Michel,

Thanks for your comments. I am happy with all of them, except
for one minor point:

| THIS PARAGRAPH SHOULD BE REWRITTEN:
| <P>WG3 requests that SC34 acknowleges the proposal by Michel
| Biezunski to donate the domain topicmaps.org to SC34 on behalf of WG3 
| under certain conditions and moves forward towards an agreement
| taking into account the conditions expressed by Michel Biezunski
| during the meeting and expressed below.</P>

I'm OK with this paragraph, but do you really want the whole text of
your proposal in the recommendations. The alternative is to register
it as a separate document and reference it from the recommendations.
Are you OK with that? If so, please forward such a document to Ken and
ask him to give it a number, and, at the same time, let me know that
you have done so, so that I can modify the recommendations accordingly.
While doing this, you should implement the change suggested by Murray
(not to mention his name explicitly), if you agree with it.

| THIS PARAGRAPH SHOULD BE DELETED:
| <P>Assuming that the transfer of topicmaps.org to SC34 can be
| accomplished before December 20th 2005, WG3 will use this domain for all
| namespaces and PSI sets that it publishes in connection with ISO 13250
| and other Topic Maps standards. Failing that, the domain topicmaps.com
| will be used for this purpose.</P>
| 
| ...
| 
| Moreover, I was not aware about the December deadline, which was
| not discussed during the portion of the meeting I attended. I would like
| to understand what is the signification of this date, why SC34 considers
| that if the transfer is not effective at that date, the PSIs have to
| be put to topicmaps.com. Not that I have any interest of delaying the
| transfer, but I want to make sure that we have a full agreement in
| place with all the details solved. And it was my understanding
| that the reason why SC34 wanted to control topicmaps.org was mainly
| because of the PSIs.
| 
| If the date has to do with a deadline for the submission of the 
| next iteration of a specific document, we could decide in advance
| that changing the name of the PSIs URLs amount to a typographical 
| correction, with no impact on the content of the standard, which 
| would give us the time to properly negotiate until a final agreement 
| is reached, if necessary.

OK. That works for me. I will delete the paragraph. The reason it was
put in was, as you guessed, because the committee decided it wanted to
deliver the final FDIS ballot text to Ken before his period of absence
in January and February, which means before Christmas. But you are
right: we can regard a change from .org to .com as a typographic
detail and implement it after the FDIS ballot has closed. That gives
us an extra two months. The FDIS ballot text can be delivered to Ken
by December 20th with the .org PSIs and namespace, whether or not an
agreement has been concluded about topicmaps.org.

| Here is the draft proposal including the conditions under
| which I am proposing to transfer the ownership of topicmaps.org.

As mentioned above, I would prefer to have this in a separate
document which is referenced from the recommendations. Is that OK
with you?

Best regards - and thanks again for making this proposal.

Steve

--
Steve Pepper <pepper@ontopia.net>
Chief Strategy Officer, Ontopia
Convenor, ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3
Editor, XTM (XML Topic Maps 1.0)