PWG Mail Archive: RE: PWG> [PDF of] PWG Process Draft

RE: PWG> [PDF of] PWG Process Draft

From: McDonald, Ira (imcdonald@sharplabs.com)
Date: Tue Feb 18 2003 - 13:51:24 EST

  • Next message: Harry Lewis: "PWG> PWG Process update"

    Hi,

    Distilled to PDF, for ease of access, and stored to same
    directory on the PWG server:

    ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/www/chair/pwg-process20-20030217.pdf

    Cheers,
    - Ira McDonald
      High North Inc

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Harry Lewis [mailto:harryl@us.ibm.com]
    Sent: Monday, February 17, 2003 11:35 PM
    To: pwg-announce@pwg.org
    Cc: pwg@pwg.org
    Subject: PWG> PWG Process Draft

    The PWG Process for developing standards is under revision. Quite a bit of
    work has gone into this, already, with several SM and PSI calls dedicating
    time to this topic as they both felt the need to crisp up the process in
    support of their own working group efforts. We have simplified the process
    and reduced the overall number of steps. At a very high level the PWG
    process now consists of a period during which

    1. Charter and requirements are developed and agreed to (exit via "Formal
    Approval of the PWG"
    2. The Standard is developed via a series of "Working Drafts" usually aimed
    at a v1.0 of the Standard (unless the Charter is to revise an existing
    standard in which case the target might be v1.1 or v2.0, for example)
    3. A "Candidate Standard" which is indication that the standards development
    activity has reach a high degree of maturity and an appropriate level for
    implementation and interop testing. Some vendors may choose to ship
    implementations based on Candidate Standards.
    4. A "Standard" (with an IEEE ISTO "number") which indicates a very stable
    version has been shown to be interoperable and has gained industry support.

    A draft of the updated PWG process is available at
    ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/www/chair/pwg-process20-20030217.doc I invite
    participation in reviewing an commenting. We may want to add a process
    diagram similar to what we have in the existing process... I haven't gotten
    to this.

    Once the new process is adopted, we will have to decide what to do about
    items currently in last call and some items which have been assigned ISTO
    "numbering" w/o having gone through the proper steps (even according to the
    existing process).

    All further discussion of this topic will take place at pwg@pwg.org and NOT
    on the ANNOUNCE list!
    ----------------------------------------------
    Harry Lewis
    Chairman - ISTO Printer Working Group
    IBM Printing Systems
    ----------------------------------------------



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 18 2003 - 13:52:21 EST