Path: sparky!uunet!uunet!not-for-mail
From: ste...@usenix.org (Stephen R. Walli)
Newsgroups: comp.std.unix
Subject: Standards Update, POSIX.0: Guide to Open Systems Environments
Date: 27 Jun 1992 16:22:22 -0700
Organization: USENIX Standards Watchdog Committee
Lines: 46
Sender: s...@ftp.UU.NET (Sean Eric Fagan)
Approved: s...@ftp.uucp (Moderator, Sean Eric Fagan)
Message-ID: <12it7eINNq13@ftp.UU.NET>
Reply-To: std-u...@uunet.uu.net
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.uu.net
X-Submissions: std-u...@uunet.uu.net
Submitted-by: ste...@usenix.org (Stephen R. Walli)
Kevin Lewis < kle...@gucci.enet.dec.com> reports on the April 8-12,
1992 meeting in Dallas, TX:
As I reported in the January Snitch for POSIX.0, the POSIX Guide to
Open Systems Environments (OSE) is going to formal ballot (finally, as
someone in the SEC said to me...). If you are in the TCOS Balloting
Pool, you should have received an invitation to join the ballot group
for this work.
The formal ballot will be on draft 15 which is being produced
presently. The changes submitted by the group to produce this draft
strictly addressed the mock ballot comments. The group agreed (after
I placed a gag order on them) not to surface or open any issues that
had previously been considered closed. This went a long way towards
our moving through the comments and objections. (By the way, if you
were one of our mock balloters, please be patient. I will be sending
out a summary along with detailed ballot resolutions after I have
completed the formal ballot package for IEEE.)
The formal ballot closure date has not yet been determined. Although
it appears that the end of August is the likely time frame. Our goal
is to have a significant number of ballot responses into IEEE and the
ballot coordinator (i.e. me), prior to the October meeting in Europe
so we can use that time for ballot resolution, as well as share the
results with our European counterparts.
Two issues remain as we move toward formal ballot. One is a rationale
document. It became apparent during the April meeting, that our
attempts to use our Issues Log along with the minutes and
institutional memory of the core participants of the group, were
lacking when it came to actually documenting our rationale for certain
issues. So the July meeting has been dedicated to the task of
developing and writing this document.
The other issue is that of public specifications. Our document is
moving into the international formal standards forums. Looking out to
the horizon, we expect their will be a lot of consternation over the
group's choice to include informal specifications in the guide.
This will undoubtedly shape into another battle of significant
proportions. The formal ballot period should offer the current
warriors a chance to take a breather.
Volume-Number: Volume 28, Number 32
|