This action item is about how we operate our workgroup going forward, and how that evolves now that we're an ISO/IEC standard as well as an OGF one.
I believe we will need to create a workgroup document describing these new practices, particularly when they augment/vary some of the standard OGF practices.
Please add to this list of issues about how we operate going forward.
- Typography: I assume we have to revise the OGF Spec to match Standard ISO format (Beyond just A4 page size) so future versions come out in that conforming style.
- Once we do this I don't want to be maintaining an OGF flavor and an ISO flavor of the formatting.
- Does a preliminary working document of the DFDL workgroup have to be specifically marked as such (so that it is clearly preliminary)? What are these markings?
- If that is done without revisions of content from current OGF content, would that replace the current ISO-provided document (which is just a new cover page on our existing OGF GFD.240 document) or does that wait for a content revision?
- Who are contacts within JTC1 ? Does the OGF Workgroup contact JTC1 by way of OGF leadership or directly? (or... what is the chain of command here? Don't want to be jumping across protocol boundaries!)
- Is there a TC within JTC1 that we should work more closely with? Right away? Eventually? Need contacts there.
- In 6 years a PAS is supposed to become an International Standard. What does that mean? Does PAS status end? Does OGF participation end, or does the workgroup merge into a TC? Or is this just a status change assuming things are going well?
- Day to day working group activity/meetings - is there guidance about notes/minutes-taking, etc. (templates)?
- Such time as we have revisions to the document, how do we engage with ISO to get an update to the PAS document? Are these voted?
- What about just typographical corrections?
- Thoughts: Do we just use the OGF process for updates/corrections and then just submit the changes to JTC1 (some TC?) for consideration?