Harm Jan Van Burg Ministery of Finance Netherlands
Roster
Harm Jan van Burg – Ministery of Finance Netherlands
Sylvia Webb – Individual
Michael Kjeldgaard – Danish Ministery of Science and Technology
Sue Probert – Individual
Kumar Sivaraman –Seebeyond
Colin Wallace – New ZealandGovernment
Jon Bosak – Sun Microsystems
Monica Martin – Sun Microsystems
Farrukh Najmi – Sun Microsystems
Pim van der Eijk – OASIS
Meeting schedule
Harm Jan says he wants find a mix of conference calls and face to face meetings.Face to face meetings better for government people and non-native speakers, two day meetings needed as one day meetings are not enough to justify travel and meeting expenses
Jon Bosak: finds face to face meetings good if it meets government requirements. Vendors want to be able to listen in, not as much drive the TC, so would welcome an opportunity to listen in.
Harm Jan van Burg: governments want to set standards in collaboration with industry. OECD set up its standards work under OASIS, precisely to work with industry partners as they are in OASIS and because the IPR issues are clear. Government-only forums abound, the TC is not needed if they are needed for that.
Sylvia Web: Tax XML experience is good, and collaboration with UBL is good for both TCs. Agrees that vendors mainly participate to learn from governments, rather than contribute.
Michael Kjeldgaard: UBL is used in Denmark, this could only happen because the government agency worked in and could drive the work of UBL. The TC discussed its role in the past. It would have a dual function:
-As coordinating/networking TC that influences other TCs in OASIS and other standards groups.
-Additionally, the TC would take on additional work, projects in Subcommittees. However, they haven’t been very active.
So at face to face TC need to discuss how to proceed and if there is enough energy to contribute.
Colin Wallace: a few people met at XML Summer School in July and discussed this. Peter Brown made notes and will distribute to the list.
Harm Jan van Burg: agrees with role as TC influencer. TC could also work on position papers, proof of concepts to show interoperability and efficiency advantage of open standards. Asks if there is an agreement that TC members want the face-to-face to continue? Agreement that this is a good plan.
Harm Jan van Burg: Based on email discussion, consensus seems to be that some form of dial-in facilities are required for the meeting, for instance at the end of the meeting.
General agreement that this is good idea.
Colin Wallace: can minutes of the first day be published on the OASIS site so people have some background?
Harm Jan van Burg: agree. Will work on the programme and discuss it on the list. Summarizes TC consensus:
-face to face in London as planned
-two day meeting
-dial in facilities at least for last part of meeting, kind of a teleconference in a meeting
-brief notes after first day posted on OASIS site
Jon Bosak: UBL works this way, only during opening and closing, model works well there.
Harm Jan van Burg: intends to contact all Subcommittee chairs to provide update for their projects. Inactive SCs with no new plans could be closed.
Colin Wallace: eGov decided to cancel all SCs, now has a concept of TC “projects”, two/three people working on a topic. SC concept was too ambitious, not feasible. Suggests to use the conference to decide on topics and mechanisms. During the conference TC should decide which projects have enough viability.
Harm Jan van Burg: will email a list of potential projects and discuss them on the list. TC members (also those not able to attend the face-to-face) can also propose new topics. During face-to-face, decide on which topics can be taken on realistically. At some point the SCs that (TC consensus agrees) have no future should be closed, also in Kavi and site.
Harm Jan van Burg: thinks a monthly TC conference call is good to check progress on projects.
Jon: UBL has TC and SCs, in practice the TC works as a kind of steering committees. SCs have their own schedules, meeting weekly. Multiple meetings to accommodate different time zones, high overhead.
Harm Jan van Burg: propose the 22:00 CET time as it is reasonable for all people. Especially if it is only a month or so.
Colin: would not object to a time better for Europeans as they are underrepresented for Europeans. Perhaps change times a few times to allow people to attend occasionally.
Jon: another good time is 0800 AM in California.
Harm Jan van Burg: will contact Europeans if the current time is problematic. Will also look at the 0800 AM California as an alternative.
Michael: agrees
TC Workplan
Harm Jan van Burg: this will be the main topic for the face-to-face.
Takes by heart note not to ask SC status.
Promises he will draft a draft agenda for face-to-face
Who has time to work on proposal for agenda?
Michael: agrees to help Harm Jan
Harm Jan van Burg: London meeting moved to other hotel.
Can people notify of their plans to attend conference?
Harm Jan van Burg: intends several conferences, one US, one Europe and one in Australia/Asia. So there is always one event in the relevant geography.
Colin Wallace: OASIS Open Standards Day Sydney is a good opportunity, but this time too close to the London event.
Colin: if we have two days, we could also have presentations from government people doing interesting work.
Harm Jan van Burg: agrees, ask the TC to provide suggestions.
His initial list of ideas based on some discussions:
-Norwegian government
- ebXML Messaging in Government
-WebSign discussion on the list
Colin: How to market the TC to other governments?
-E.g. notify IDABC.
-Open Forum: invite 17th October attendees to stay on for the eGov TC meeting.
Harm Jan van Burg: will also ask the 23 OECD Tax associations to promote the event among OECD member countries: 144 countries.
It would be great if OECD would view this TC like the tax group in the OECD views Tax XML.