Fwd: Notice from OASIS Administration
0 views
Skip to first unread message
Nuwan Waidyanatha
Jun 21, 2016, 7:06:10 PM6/21/16
to Sahana Software Foundation, Devin Balkind
Hello All,
The OASIS membership has expired. Should we renew it?
Nuwan
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <member_...@oasis-open.org>
Date: Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 12:16 AM
Subject: Notice from OASIS Administration
To: nu...@sahanafoundation.org
Dear Sahana Software Foundation Representative,
Subject: Notice from OASIS Administration
As representative for Sahana Software Foundation, be advised your membership is in jeopardy of being canceled.
With this action all rights of membership will end and all employee/representatives will no longer have access to OASIS members-only resources. You and other employees will automatically receive individual notice of termination, Chairs of committees where your employees were members will also be notified.
The details of your Continuing Licensing Obligation can be found in the OASIS IPR Policy.
If it is not your intent to cancel your OASIS membership and end all rights now, please contact OASIS Member Service staff as soon as possible.
Thank you for your participation in OASIS.
Member Services
member-...@oasis-open.org
+1 781-425-5073
From: <member_...@oasis-open.org>
Date: Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 12:16 AM
Subject: Notice from OASIS Administration
To: nu...@sahanafoundation.org
Dear Sahana Software Foundation Representative,
Subject: Notice from OASIS Administration
As representative for Sahana Software Foundation, be advised your membership is in jeopardy of being canceled.
With this action all rights of membership will end and all employee/representatives will no longer have access to OASIS members-only resources. You and other employees will automatically receive individual notice of termination, Chairs of committees where your employees were members will also be notified.
The details of your Continuing Licensing Obligation can be found in the OASIS IPR Policy.
If it is not your intent to cancel your OASIS membership and end all rights now, please contact OASIS Member Service staff as soon as possible.
Thank you for your participation in OASIS.
Member Services
member-...@oasis-open.org
+1 781-425-5073
Fran Boon
Jun 22, 2016, 4:09:12 AM6/22/16
to Nuwan Waidyanatha, Sahana Software Foundation, Devin Balkind
As-always we should decide this in the wider knowledge:
* What budget do we have?
* What would this cost?
* What other items are competing with this?
* What are the benefits of being a member?
- for me there are 4 potential ones:
(i) We get early information on emerging standards so we can start
targetting them earlier (& avoid targetting versions which are about
to become obsolete)
(ii) We get to input on these standards to help make them more
relevant for the communities we serve.
(iii) We get to use this membership in our marketing to give us weight.
(iv) We are supporting standards which we believe in as a common good
(although perhaps we're too small to be doing this when there are
plenty of bigger fish doing this already ;) )
Are there others? How do they stack up in practise? Do we really get
any of these benefits?
I must confess I'm sceptical, although very happy to be persuaded otherwise :)
In general I am positive about continuing our membership but don't
want to make decisions in isolation, devoid of the wider picture.
F
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "standards" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to standards+...@sahanafoundation.org.
* What budget do we have?
* What would this cost?
* What other items are competing with this?
* What are the benefits of being a member?
- for me there are 4 potential ones:
(i) We get early information on emerging standards so we can start
targetting them earlier (& avoid targetting versions which are about
to become obsolete)
(ii) We get to input on these standards to help make them more
relevant for the communities we serve.
(iii) We get to use this membership in our marketing to give us weight.
(iv) We are supporting standards which we believe in as a common good
(although perhaps we're too small to be doing this when there are
plenty of bigger fish doing this already ;) )
Are there others? How do they stack up in practise? Do we really get
any of these benefits?
I must confess I'm sceptical, although very happy to be persuaded otherwise :)
In general I am positive about continuing our membership but don't
want to make decisions in isolation, devoid of the wider picture.
F
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "standards" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to standards+...@sahanafoundation.org.
Louiqa Raschid
Jun 23, 2016, 3:00:04 AM6/23/16
to stan...@sahanafoundation.org
Fran and Nuwan - Sahana is not a functional entity so there is
no benefit to Sahana. If this can be linked to some active projects
then it can be justified. So someone has to speak up and support
membership. Louiqa
Fran Boon
Jun 23, 2016, 6:08:07 AM6/23/16
to Louiqa Raschid, Sahana Software Foundation
On 23 June 2016 at 08:00, Louiqa Raschid <lou...@umiacs.umd.edu> wrote:
> Fran and Nuwan - Sahana is not a functional entity
!? ;)
> Fran and Nuwan - Sahana is not a functional entity
> so there is
> no benefit to Sahana. If this can be linked to some active projects
> then it can be justified. So someone has to speak up and support
> membership. Louiqa
"Do we really get any of these benefits? I must confess I'm sceptical"
Whilst USD 1200 isn't huge, I think we can probably achieve more by
spending that money on something else.
(Still happy to be persuaded otherwise)
F
Nuwan Waidyanatha
Jun 24, 2016, 12:19:49 AM6/24/16
to Francis Boon, Sahana Software Foundation, Devin Balkind, Dominic König
We haven't heard from Dominic?
> As-always we should decide this in the wider knowledge:
> * What budget do we have?
We had set aside money from CAP on a Map overheads to cover this
> * What would this cost?
$1200, as you already mentioned
> * What other items are competing with this?
For that small amount none that I know of
> * What are the benefits of being a member?
> - for me there are 4 potential ones:
> (i) We get early information on emerging standards so we can start
> targetting them earlier (& avoid targetting versions which are about
> to become obsolete)
+1 this has always been the primary supporting cause. Then again we have enough friends in OASIS we could ask them for updates.
> (ii) We get to input on these standards to help make them more
> relevant for the communities we serve.
The bi-weekly meeting time of the CAP Sub Committee meeting has been bad for me and I haven't been able to attend. Without attending the meetings I cannot be a voting member.
With the membership we have access to the meeting minutes to comment, if we want to but it is not the same feeling as being part of the debate.
Generally speaking we haven't been active in contributing , maybe Dominic has? We often receive documents for public review but don't contribute?
> (iii) We get to use this membership in our marketing to give us weight.
+1
I am not sure how much (iii) - marketing - influence our work or how much our clients perceive the value of the membership. My guess not much because they haven't heard of OASIS.
> (iv) We are supporting standards which we believe in as a common good
> (although perhaps we're too small to be doing this when there are
> plenty of bigger fish doing this
>
> Are there others? How do they stack up in practise? Do we really get
> any of these benefits?
Google and Canada are the dominating forces in CAP-SC.
> I must confess I'm sceptical, although very happy to be persuaded otherwise :)
>
We seem to have the same debate each year and end up paying.
Shall we try NOT paying this time to see what happens?
We could always join anytime , it can't be laborious process to rejoin.
Nuwan
Dominic König
Jun 24, 2016, 3:29:40 AM6/24/16
to Nuwan Waidyanatha, Francis Boon, Sahana Software Foundation, Devin Balkind
I kinda discussed this with Fran already, so just summarizing my standpoint
here:
Overall, I have not seen that adopters have chosen Sahana because SSF are a
member of OASIS, nor that there was any technical decision that would have
been different without that membership - nor that SSF has made any relevant
impact on OASIS standard development.
---
For Fran's cases:
i) Getting early information about emerging standards, to me, does not depend
on the OASIS membership - and in the past this kind of information came much
more and much more often from stakeholder organisations and/or technology
peers.
And in many cases (like in the case of CAP but also TEP), there is a
significant pre-OASIS development that is both rich and accessible enough for
us to orient ourselves - it is very rare (if at all real) that OASIS technical
committees start developing standards from scratch.
Moreover, an emerging standard that had no visible pre-OASIS development, and
no lobby outside of OASIS is very very unlikely to be adopted as a standard
any time soon - because it is actually important for OASIS standards to have a
certain level of openness and market relevance before it can be proposed.
ii) Through our membership, we are entitled to actively participate in the
development of standards (both emerging and existing) in the technical
committees, and influence proposals on behalf of our stakeholders.
But as I see it, our stakeholder organisations are typically much bigger than
we are - and while our voice in the standard development would be more of a
whispering, our real weight lies in those relationships.
OASIS, like any other standardisation organisation, is dominated by big
corporations and organisations - some of which are partners, and some of which
are stakeholder of Sahana. Nurturing those relationships and helping with the
widespread implementation of standards through open tools is therefore, in my
opinion, a better and more affordable strategy for SSF - rather than trying to
stem the heavy weight of attritional committee work.
iii) As said above, I don't see that our OASIS membership has a significant
influence on our market position - if any at all. I guess most of our
stakeholders would just shrug if we told them that we left OASIS.
It may, however, be relevant for marketing to have our tools certified as
compliant with OASIS standards - which is though orthogonal to a membership.
iv) see (ii)
---
My bottom line is that:
a) for the OASIS membership to be(come) relevant enough for Sahana to justify
the costs, we would have to have strategic goals specifically in the standards
development (rather than standards implementation). I don't think we have.
b) for the OASIS membership to be(come) effective, we would need to invest a
significant amount of time and effort into research, community discussion and
committee work - which for a small organisation like SSF means to align all
operations to standards development. I don't think that's anywhere near what
we want to do, can afford or what is expected of us.
So, I think we should end this membership and make better use of that money,
like:
c) it is however relevant for us (or could be relevant) to
- build/nurture our partnerships with technical peers who are relevant players
in OASIS standards development
- to lobby for and support our stakeholders to implement relevant OASIS
standards through our open tools
- [maybe] have our tools certified for compliance with certain standards *if*
that helps with our marketing
Dominic
here:
Overall, I have not seen that adopters have chosen Sahana because SSF are a
member of OASIS, nor that there was any technical decision that would have
been different without that membership - nor that SSF has made any relevant
impact on OASIS standard development.
---
For Fran's cases:
i) Getting early information about emerging standards, to me, does not depend
on the OASIS membership - and in the past this kind of information came much
more and much more often from stakeholder organisations and/or technology
peers.
And in many cases (like in the case of CAP but also TEP), there is a
significant pre-OASIS development that is both rich and accessible enough for
us to orient ourselves - it is very rare (if at all real) that OASIS technical
committees start developing standards from scratch.
Moreover, an emerging standard that had no visible pre-OASIS development, and
no lobby outside of OASIS is very very unlikely to be adopted as a standard
any time soon - because it is actually important for OASIS standards to have a
certain level of openness and market relevance before it can be proposed.
ii) Through our membership, we are entitled to actively participate in the
development of standards (both emerging and existing) in the technical
committees, and influence proposals on behalf of our stakeholders.
But as I see it, our stakeholder organisations are typically much bigger than
we are - and while our voice in the standard development would be more of a
whispering, our real weight lies in those relationships.
OASIS, like any other standardisation organisation, is dominated by big
corporations and organisations - some of which are partners, and some of which
are stakeholder of Sahana. Nurturing those relationships and helping with the
widespread implementation of standards through open tools is therefore, in my
opinion, a better and more affordable strategy for SSF - rather than trying to
stem the heavy weight of attritional committee work.
iii) As said above, I don't see that our OASIS membership has a significant
influence on our market position - if any at all. I guess most of our
stakeholders would just shrug if we told them that we left OASIS.
It may, however, be relevant for marketing to have our tools certified as
compliant with OASIS standards - which is though orthogonal to a membership.
iv) see (ii)
---
My bottom line is that:
a) for the OASIS membership to be(come) relevant enough for Sahana to justify
the costs, we would have to have strategic goals specifically in the standards
development (rather than standards implementation). I don't think we have.
b) for the OASIS membership to be(come) effective, we would need to invest a
significant amount of time and effort into research, community discussion and
committee work - which for a small organisation like SSF means to align all
operations to standards development. I don't think that's anywhere near what
we want to do, can afford or what is expected of us.
So, I think we should end this membership and make better use of that money,
like:
c) it is however relevant for us (or could be relevant) to
- build/nurture our partnerships with technical peers who are relevant players
in OASIS standards development
- to lobby for and support our stakeholders to implement relevant OASIS
standards through our open tools
- [maybe] have our tools certified for compliance with certain standards *if*
that helps with our marketing
Dominic
Louiqa Raschid
Jun 24, 2016, 10:29:40 PM6/24/16
to Dominic König, Nuwan Waidyanatha, Francis Boon, Sahana Software Foundation, Devin Balkind
Out of curiosity I dug around to see when and why we
joined OASIS. A Sahana blog post from 2012 (when we
joined) was not very illuminative.
http://sahanafoundation.org/sahana-joins-oasis/
But on the OASIS site I saw this ACK of Mark Prutsalis'
contributions - so clearly at some time in the past
- OASIS membership - and contributing to HAVE - was
a key part of SSF activities.
https://docs.oasis-open.org/emergency/edxl-have/v2.0/csd01/edxl-have-v2.0-csd01.html
Is anyone in touch with Mark? I did a search and he does
not seem to be active in the disaster management or
standards space.
So it seems to make sense to drop the OASIS membership
until we find a compelling reason to pick up the
membership again.
Louiqa
Devin Balkind
Jun 26, 2016, 4:29:58 PM6/26/16
to Louiqa Raschid, Dominic König, Nuwan Waidyanatha, Francis Boon, Sahana Software Foundation
Nice research Louiqa.
I'm in touch with Mark. I don't think he's active in the space anymore. I can ask.
For now it seems we should let the OASIS membership elapse and not renew. I'll take it out of our Operations budget. I'm sure we can rejoin OASIS later if needed.
How does that sound to everyone?
--
Devin Balkind
President, Sahana Software Foundation
m. 917.748.1048
Louiqa Raschid
Jun 26, 2016, 5:01:56 PM6/26/16
to Devin Balkind, Dominic König, Nuwan Waidyanatha, Francis Boon, Sahana Software Foundation
+1. And yes I am known to have a knack for research :)
> m. 917.748.1048
>
>
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages