Farrukh Najmi wrote:
>
> David RR Webber wrote:
>
> >Joe,
> >
> >OK - despite Scott saying that BC-ICS is not IBMs answer to CAM,
> >the fact remains that if you have CAM, which we do, CAM is available
> >in open source - and an OASIS spec' - then there is absolutely no
> >earthly reason why you would want to do ICS instead.
> >
> >
> +1
>
> We should not even consider a spec until it is in an open standards body.
Farrukh, could you please elaborate on your meaning of "consider"?
Separately: I do think that it's wise for technical committees (OASIS
and beyond) to be aware of what is out there, and - out of that set -
what is likely to be advanced into an open standards consortium in the
future, and how likely.
Joe
> Next we should not encourage specs that duplicate existing specs within
> open standards orgs.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Farrukh
