[Fiware-oasc-etsi] Please email by Monday noon if you see something important missing from this Agenda for the kick-off meeting --> UPDATE v2

[Mulligan, Catherine E A]

Agree with point 5


--
Dr Catherine Mulligan
Research Fellow
Co Director, Imperial College Centre for Cryptocurrency Research and Engineering

OASC Standardisation // oascities.org<http://oascities.org/>
Director and Co-Founder of Contextualised // http://www.contextualised.com/
+ 44 753 888 7477
c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk<mailto:c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk>


From: <fiware-oasc-etsi-bounces at lists.fiware.org> on behalf of Lindsay Frost <Lindsay.Frost at neclab.eu>
Date: Sunday, 8 January 2017 at 06:19
To: Juanjo Hierro <juanjose.hierro at fiware.org>, "gilles.privat at orange.com" <gilles.privat at orange.com>, "Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org" <Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org>
Subject: [Fiware-oasc-etsi] Please email by Monday noon if you see something important missing from this Agenda for the kick-off meeting --> UPDATE v2

Dear Juanjo, Dear Gilles and all,

FAQ1: The location of the kickoff meeting should be in Sophia Antipolis, ETSI HQ,

FAQ2: The room IRIS B3 fits 30 people (in the classroom format) and is reserved,
with ~15 in the boardroom style. If we there is a lot of registrations then we may need
to reserve an added room but I guesstimate about 15.

FAQ3: Adding OASC and FIWARE for liaisons, and other organisations too, is
not a problem because we can handle it as normal business with no need for formal voting.
Formal voting is only for official positions, spending money (not going to happen), formally
deciding a highly contentious issue, and (later) agreeing on a Group Specification.

FAQ4: If OASC or FIWARE become ETSI Members before the kickoff meeting, they should
sign the Members Agreement so that they have voting rights. Note that there is no proxying
so that if e.g. Telefonica wants to vote and FIWARE wants to vote then it needs 2 people.
One vote, one organisation, one person. (Extra persons from any organisation can attend of course.)

FAQ5: It has been suggested to speed up " interactive and fruitful  discussions" outside of
the formal plenary session in sub-groups.  This risks however alienating delegates who would
like to be in two places at the same time. Particularly if we get people from OMA or oneM2M or
TMF it would be good to keep the contributions (and any objections/comments) all "visible" to all.
Later meetings after the kick-off could be split without much risk, and of course we can have any
number of virtual meetings on specific sub-topics.
Additional options for discussion (maybe others occur to you):

(a)    the formalities on Day1 can be kept shorter and as fast as possible

(b)   people or teams could submit contributions well in advance so delegates have time to prepare
comments and suggestions, which can be tabled and worked through pretty fast

(c)    at a certain point we could split into four corners of the room for whiteboard talks,
and any delegate can easily see/hear roughly what the others are arguing about.

This might be a good way to draft the scope of the new work items, along the themes Gilles noted:

1.       Overall architecture and APIs

2.       Cross-domain information metamodel

3.       Domain-specific data models/vocabularies+Open data publication

FAQ6: ...
________________________________________
Dr. Lindsay Frost, Chief Standardization Eng.
frost at neclab.eu<mailto:frost at neclab.eu>     Mobile +49.163.275.1734
NEC Laboratories Europe, Kurfürsten-Anlage 36,
D-69115 Heidelberg, Germany.

Reg. Headoffice: NEC Europe Ltd, VAT DE161569151
Athene, Odyssey Business Park, West End Road,
London HA4 6QE, Reg. in England 2832014

From: fiware-oasc-etsi-bounces at lists.fiware.org [mailto:fiware-oasc-etsi-bounces at lists.fiware.org] On Behalf Of Juanjo Hierro
Sent: Samstag, 7. Januar 2017 13:48
To: Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org
Subject: Re: [Fiware-oasc-etsi] Please email by Monday noon if you see something important missing from this Agenda for the kick-off meeting


Dear Lindsay,

  Thanks for the document.   A very silly question, but I guess important :-) ... Where is the kick-off meeting going to take place?

  Content-wise about the agenda, on the point about liaison statements, I wonder whether we should add OASC and FIWARE.   Other than that, there is nothing that comes to my mind at the moment.

  BTW, it is our intention that the FIWARE Foundation becomes member of ETSI and then participate in the ISG.   I hope that the applications is approved on time for the kick-off

  Cheers,

-- Juanjo

_______________________



FIWARE Foundation CTO

http://fiware.org

twitter: @FIWARE

twitter: @JuanjoHierro



From: gilles.privat at orange.com [mailto:gilles.privat at orange.com]
Sent: Freitag, 6. Januar 2017 19:15
To: Lindsay Frost
Cc: Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org
Subject: RE: Please email by Monday noon if you see something important missing from this Agenda for the kick-off meeting


Dear Lindsay



How many people do we expect for this meeting, and could we possibly separate the issues that have be discussed in a plenary for statutory reasons from those that could be discussed in subgroups?

I am worried that we may spend too much time in presentations of formal procedures wrapped in opaque legalese, and not enough in more  interactive and fruitful  discussions on the core of the matter : as we already experienced when we tried to wrap our heads around  these issues of information models  within FI-Core, these matters are so abstract that they cannot easily be discussed in confcall, so we should  seize the occasion of every F2F meeting to discuss them in productive way, which means birds of a feather groups of ~5 people huddled  in front of a whiteboard, not 20 people slouching passively in a lecture hall .

Would it be  realistic to divide in subgroups in order to start thrashing out  these deep technical issues?

Even if they do not match exactly with your proposed workitems, I see a potential  division  in 3 subgroups :they match more or less  the bullets in the normative agenda  of the ToR document, and do also correspond (very coarsely) to  different sets of  interests and competences

4.       Overall architecture and APIs

5.       Cross-domain information metamodel

6.       Domain-specific data models/vocabularies+Open data publication



Cordially



Gilles


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-oasc-etsi/attachments/20170107/81a18e23/attachment-0001.html>