Revision Date: 2006-09-16
Source: Andrew Josey, Chair
Action: for review and planning
This is an estimated project timeline. This will be updated after each meeting.
Note that the exact dates will be adjusted to fit into the week
schedules.
We are aiming for the Sept 2008 Standards Board meeting for IEEE
Approval
For IEEE we will need to reform the ballot pool.
We need to start drafting a PAR for approval within PASC, prior
to IEEE.
Suggested to submit a PAR to PASC in June 2006, for two months approval,
Suggest submit PAR to IEEE in August for attention at the Sept 2006
standards board
At ISO the PE will report at the Sept 2006 SC22 what we plan to do.
We need to determine
the exact paperwork requirements.
At ISO , the document would progress through the usual 5 stage process
Draft 2 --> CD registration +
CD Ballot (feature complete) 3 months ballot +
1 month administrative overhead
FCD Ballot (doc freezes) 4 months
FDIS Ballot (yes/no) 2 months
Done
We will need to declare a cutoff date for defect report against the
existing standard.
Draft 1 :
Not feature complete
No new submissions incorporated but all other changes applied
from interps, rdvks, sd/5
Austin Group review only
Change bars against existing standard (inc TC1+TC2)
We could limit this review to the change bar'd text only, with
the next draft being open for comments on the whole text?
===> July 31 2006 new material complete
Draft 2
(cannot happen earlier than October 2006)
New submissions incorporated
Feature complete
We will submit to ISO for concurrent CD registration
and CD ballot (3 months)
Announce to The Open Group membership inviting
participation in the Austin Group review
First IEEE ballot (3 months)
Change bars against existing standard (inc TC1+TC2)
This will be a 3 month AG review synch'd with the
IEEE ballot hopefully also with ISO
===> Ballot resolution meeting (estimated Feb 2007 warm location
TBD)
Draft 3
(cannot happen before April 1 2007)
Narrowing down rules apply to Austin Group and IEEE
review
Second IEEE ballot (30 day)
FCD ballot (4 month) (note if D2 review
results anticipate a D4 we should extend the FCD ballot to 6 months)
(FCD ballot completes no
sooner than August 1 2007)
This will be a 30 day AG review sync'd with IEEE
===> Ballot resolution meeting (face to face or telco TBD, likely
to know after D2 ballot resolution complete)
Draft 4
(cannot happen before June 1 2007)
Standby draft if needed (can be parallel to D3 FCD ballot)
If needed this draft has to end review before the FCD
ballot closes, so that comments can be fed into the FCD ballot
This would be a 30 day IEEE ballot
Draft 5
(cannot happen before September 1 2007)
The Open Group company review
IEEE final recirculation ballot
ISO FDIS ballot (2 months)
Draft 6 Final Publication
Table 1 - Austin Group Specification Draft Schedule
Date | Title of deliverable | Type | Probability | Resources Needed | Assumptions and Dependencies | |
People | Financial | |||||
2006 March 31 |
1st deadline for
announcement of new submissions |
Email to Chair |
100 |
1 (1 development manager) | 1 staff day to manage incoming submissions | |
2006 June 30 |
Draft 1 | Draft Standard | 80 | 2 (1 development manager (40%), and one technical editor (40%)) | 10 staff weeks editing + project management . | Merging of interpretations, and defect report
changes identifed in SD/5. The cutoff date for aardvark changes to make
this draft is June 12 2006 |
2006 July 1 - Aug 31 |
Draft 1 Review | Aardvark bug reports | 80 | 1 (1 development manager) | 3 staff days to manage incoming aardvark and prepare for review meeting. | Assumes working group review the document. |
2006 July 31 |
Cutoff date for
submissions of new material |
Text submissions plus
editing plan |
100 |
1 (1 development manager) | 1 staff day to manage
incoming submissions |
Assumes submissions in an
acceptable format with clear editing instructions for the merge |
2006 Sep 12-15 |
Draft 1 Review Meeting (ISO Editing Group
meeting) |
Change Request Report | 80 | 2 (1 development manager, and one technical editor) | 6 staff days to attend Review Meeting | This will either be a meeting in Reading, UK or
a series of teleconferences. IEEE PAR approved 15 Sep 2006. |
2006
October 31 |
Draft 2 | Draft Standard | 80 | 2 (1 development manager (40%), and one technical editor (40%)) | Staff time for production of drafts (10 weeks). Project management (4 days). | Incorporates new submissions, options reorganization, interpretations, SD5 items and aardvark from D1 review. |
2006 Oct 31 - 2007 Jan 31
|
Draft 2 review |
Aardvark bug reports |
80 |
1 (1 development manager) |
3 staff days to manage incoming aardvark and prepare for review meeting. | This is a 90 day
review.First IEEE ballot. Submit to ISO for concurrent CD registration
and CD ballot |
2007 Feb 26-Mar 2 (week
of) |
Draft 2 Face to face
review meeting |
Change Request Report |
80 |
2 (1 development manager, and one technical editor) | 10 staff days plus travel and living costs to attend Review Meeting | To be confirmed, Bay Area or Austin Texas. Week of Feb 26-Mar2, assumes meeting room with external phone line, internet link and pc projector. |
2007 May 15 |
Draft 3 |
Draft Standard | 80 | 2 (1 development manager (40%), and one technical editor (40%)) | Staff time for production of drafts (6 weeks). Project management (4 days). | Merges in aardvark from D2 review |
2007
May 15 - June 15 |
Draft 3 Review | Aardvark bug reports | 80 | 1 (1 development manager) | 3 staff days to manage incoming aardvark and prepare for review meeting. | Assumes working group review the document. 2nd IEEE ballot. ISO FCD ballot. |
2007 Jun ?? |
Draft 3 Review Meeting | Change Request Report | 80 | 2 (1 development manager, and one technical editor) | TBD | Maybe telco or f2f, TBD.Meeting to be hosted by TBD, assumes meeting room with external phone line, internet link and pc projector. |
2007 Aug 1 |
Draft 4 | Draft Standard | 80 | 2 (1 development manager (40%), and one technical editor (40%)) | Staff time for production of drafts (6 weeks). Project Management (4 days). | This is standby draft depending on the amount of change being proposed to the standard. |
2007
Aug 1 - Sep 15 |
Draft 4 Review | Aardvark bug reports | 80 | 1 (1 development manager) | 3 staff days to manage incoming aardvark and prepare for review meeting. | Assumes working group review the document |
2007 Oct ?? |
Draft 4 Review Meeting | Change Request Report | 80 | 2 (1 development manager, and one technical editor) | TBD | Maybe telco or f2f, TBD.Meeting to be hosted by TBD, assumes meeting room with external phone line, internet link and pc projector. |
2007 Dec 15 |
Draft 5 | Draft Standard | 80 | 2 (1 development manager (40%), and one technical editor (40%)) | Staff time for production of drafts (6 weeks). Project management (4 days). | The Open Group Company review draft, and IEEE recirculation ballot |
2007
Dec 15 - 2008 Jan 31 |
Draft 5 Review | Aardvark bug reports | 80 | 1 (1 development manager) | 3 staff days to manage incoming aardvark and prepare for review meeting. | Assumes working group review the document |
2008 Feb ?? |
Draft 5 Review Meeting |
Change Request Report | 80 | 2 (1 development manager, and one technical editor) | TBD | Maybe telco or f2f, TBD.Meeting to be hosted by TBD, assumes meeting room with external phone line, internet link and pc projector. |
2008 March 1 |
Sanity Draft 6 |
Draft Standard | 80 | 2 (1 development manager (40%), and one technical editor (40%)) | Staff time for production of drafts (4 weeks). Project management (4 days) | |
2008 March 1-15 |
Sanity Review | Aardvark bug reports | 80 | 1 (1 development manager) | 3 staff days to manage incoming aardvark and prepare for review meeting. | Assumes working group review the document |
2008 March 22 |
Sanity Review telco if needed |
Change Request Report | 80 | 2 (1 development manager, and one technical editor) | 2 staff hours | Telco meeting to resolve final issues arising from the Sanity Review |
2008 April ?? | Final Draft 6.1 |
Recirculation Draft Standard | 80 | 2 (1 development manager (40%), and one technical editor (40%)) | Staff time for production of drafts (2 week per draft) | Enter final approval process. If recirculations are needed they iterate at one month intervals. Editorial work expected on frontmatter for publication. |