[oslc-plm] What is the future of the ALM-PLM Interoperability WG?

[Allan Behrens]

Hi Sean,
Unfortunately I'm not a member of OASIS but would like to continue to add value where appropriate. (Obviously) that doesn't include the technical areas - more from a marketing/strategy angle as we've been engaged together some time ago. If the working group did move across to OASIS then I'm sorry but I  probably won't be able to participate.
Best

Allan
Allan Behrens
[Taxal_Logo_RGB_50pc]<http://www.taxal.com/>
         www.taxal.com<http://www.taxal.com/>
            Skype : allanbehrens
T: +44 1663 734012 M:+44 7947 718555
The Chimes of Taxal, High Peak, SK23 7DY

From: Oslc-Plm [mailto:oslc-plm-bounces at open-services.net] On Behalf Of Sean Kennedy
Sent: 19 March 2014 18:01
To: oslc-plm at open-services.net
Subject: [oslc-plm] What is the future of the ALM-PLM Interoperability WG?


Hello OSLC ALM-PLM Interoperability WG members (and those who follow the mailing list):

With many of the OSLC WGs having already transitioned to OASIS, and others, i.e. Requirements, Architecture, and Quality Management, having started work on a joint Charter, I think the time has come to resurrect discussions of the future of this WG.

Should a new TC at OASIS be created to handle all the work of the WG?
Should existing specs be contributed to a TC, existing or new, while certain other discussions, say about scenarios, continue on at OSLC (maybe as a User Group - which doesn't require participants to execute a WPA and may lead to broader participation)?
Should something else be done?

ALM-PLM Interoperability is a topic interesting to many organizations (considering getting) involved in OSLC, so it is important to provide clarity of direction, at least, as soon as we can.

My sense is we need some criteria, a framework, if you will, for making this decision. As I haven't been involved in the day-to-day of this WG to now, I'll only start with some questions I think are relevant, and look to others in the WG to help mature them into such a framework.
1. Is it important that the specs the WG has drafted be standardized?
2. If so, is standardization at an independent SDO (like OASIS) important? (As opposed to being completed at OSLC.)
3. Are their topics (whether scenarios, specs, or others) that should continue to be worked on by this group?
4. If so, what is the best way to ensure broad participation from among the relevant stakeholders? (I'm assuming "broad participation" is desired.)

I hope to contribute my experiences and knowledge of OASIS and the WGs we've transitioned to TCs to this discussion and am willing to help with anything that will facilitate us reaching a decision and building a plan of action.
I look forward to hearing from you all - thanks for your attention, and, in advance, for your feedback.

Best regards,

________________________________

Sean Kennedy



[IBM]

OSLC Community Development Leader for IBM Rational



Operations Coordinator for the OSLC Steering Committee











Phone:

+1-905-413-4385

8200 Warden Ave

Fax:

+1-905-413-4850

Markham, Ontario L6G 1C7

Email:

seanpk at ca.ibm.com<mailto:seanpk at ca.ibm.com>

D1/R0A/8200/MKM

LinkedIn:

http://www.linkedin.com/in/seanpk

Canada

________________________________

[cid:image003.gif at 01CF44E6.2987DB90]



OSLC: Lifecycle integration inspired by the web

http://open-services.net

Eclipse Lyo: Enabling tool integration with OSLC

http://eclipse.org/lyo



There is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come. -- Victor Hugo





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-plm_open-services.net/attachments/20140321/57673a3b/attachment-0003.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 9047 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-plm_open-services.net/attachments/20140321/57673a3b/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1851 bytes
Desc: image002.gif
URL: <http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-plm_open-services.net/attachments/20140321/57673a3b/attachment.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1651 bytes
Desc: image003.gif
URL: <http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-plm_open-services.net/attachments/20140321/57673a3b/attachment-0001.gif>