<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 18px; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;">
<div>
<div>The SIS Area is ok with the proposed resolutions to our RIDs.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"></span>—keith</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div id="MAC_OUTLOOK_SIGNATURE"></div>
</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION">
<div style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:12pt; text-align:left; color:black; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt">
<span style="font-weight:bold">From: </span>Ramon Krosley<br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Reply-To: </span>"<a href="mailto:r.krosley@andropogon.org">r.krosley@andropogon.org</a>"<br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Date: </span>Wednesday, July 8, 2015 at 11:11 PM<br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">To: </span>Tom Gannett<br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Cc: </span>Jonathan Wilmot, Richard Barton, "<a href="mailto:jean-francois.dufour@esa.int">jean-francois.dufour@esa.int</a>", Peter Shames, "Scott, Keith L."<br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Subject: </span>Fw: Re: Results of CESG Poll CESG-P-2015-03-008 Approval to release CCSDS 876.1-R-1, Spacecraft Onboard Interface Services-Specification for Dictionary of Terms for Electronic Data Sheets for Onboard Components
(Red Book, Issue 1) for CCSDS Agency r...<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div style="padding:5px; line-height: 1.3em; font-size: 13px; color: #333; background-color: #FFF; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">
Tom, here is the email sent in May. It explains the attachment, which contains the documents and replies to comments. Thanks for your help!<br>
Ramon<br>
<div style="padding:3px 0 3px 0;border-top:1px solid #DDD; border-bottom: 1px solid #DDD;margin:3px 0 3px 0">
---- Original Message ----<br>
From: "Ramon Krosley" <<a href="mailto:r.krosley@andropogon.org">r.krosley@andropogon.org</a>><br>
To: <a href="mailto:kscott@mitre.org">kscott@mitre.org</a>, <a href="mailto:tomaso.decola@dlr.de">
tomaso.decola@dlr.de</a>, <a href="mailto:peter.shames@jpl.nasa.gov">peter.shames@jpl.nasa.gov</a><br>
Cc: <a href="mailto:richard.melvin@scisys.co.uk">richard.melvin@scisys.co.uk</a><br>
Sent: May 18, 2015 08:29:26 MDT<br>
Subject: Re: Results of CESG Poll CESG-P-2015-03-008 Approval to release CCSDS 876.1-R-1, Spacecraft Onboard Interface Services-Specification for Dictionary of Terms for Electronic Data Sheets for Onboard Components (Red Book, Issue 1) for CCSDS Agency review</div>
<br>
<br>
Richard Melvin and I have been coordinating the improvements to the EDS and DoT red books. The attachment contains the revised documents and replies to your comments. <span style="line-height: 16.8999996185303px;">There are two directories in the attachment,
one for EDS and one for DoT. Please let us know whether these changes are satisfactory.</span><br>
<br>
(The attachment was renamed in case your mail systems filter .zip files. To use the attachment, rename its file type from .zp to .zip; it's a standard windows compressed directory. Let me know if I should retransmit in some other form.)<br>
<br>
Ramon Krosley<br>
<div style="padding:3px 0 3px 0;border-top:1px solid #DDD; border-bottom: 1px solid #DDD;margin:3px 0 3px 0">
On April 16, 2015 13:25 MDT, "Ramon Krosley" <<a href="mailto:r.krosley@andropogon.org">r.krosley@andropogon.org</a>> wrote:</div>
<br>
<br>
Many thanks for these comments! I'll work through them, and communicate further.<br>
<br>
On the issue of relationship with XTCE and Spacecraft Monitoring and Control, there are a couple of developing activities.
<ul>
<li>One activity is the green book that is being written now in the SOIS APP working group. It contains an "onion diagram" which shows where XTCE could be used and where SOIS EDS's could be used. This diagram could be a topic for discussion between SM&C and
SOIS-APP. I'll leave it to Jonathan to organize that discussion, if that's appropriate.
</li><li>The other development comes from the fact that Kevin Rice is in the SOIS APP working group, and he is one of the authors of XTCE. Kevin and I have been discussing how the DoT could be used in XTCE, which could provide continuity of terminology across vehicle
and mission control. </li></ul>
Ramon<br>
<br>
<div style="padding:3px 0 3px 0;border-top:1px solid #DDD; border-bottom: 1px solid #DDD;margin:3px 0 3px 0">
On April 16, 2015 11:48 MDT, "Thomas Gannett" <<a href="mailto:tomg@aiaa.org">tomg@aiaa.org</a>> wrote:</div>
<br>
<br>
Dear Jonathan et al.:<br>
<br>
The CESG poll to approve release of the SOIS DoT Red Book concluded with conditions. The conditions are stated below; attachments referenced in the conditions are attached to this message (876x1r0_CESG_Approval-SEA.pdf and 876.1-R-1.zipx).<br>
<br>
Also attached is the Word file (876x1r0_CESG_Approval.doc) used to create the PDF file used in the poll.
<u>Please use it to make changes in response to conditions.</u><br>
<br>
Resolution of the conditions should be negotiated directly with the authors of the conditions (CCed) and reported back to the CESG.<br>
<br>
Best regards,<br>
Tom Gannett<br>
<blockquote cite="" class="cite" type="cite">CESG E-Poll Identifier: CESG-P-2015-03-008 Approval to release CCSDS 876.1-R-1, Spacecraft Onboard Interface Services-Specification for Dictionary of Terms for Electronic Data Sheets for Onboard Components (Red Book,
Issue 1) for CCSDS Agency review<br>
Results of CESG poll beginning 29 March 2015 and ending 15 April 2015:<br>
<br>
Abstain: 2 (25%) (Barkley, Calzolari)<br>
Approve Unconditionally: 4 (50%) (Merri, Behal, Suess, Barton)<br>
Approve with Conditions: 2 (25%) (Shames, Scott)<br>
Disapprove with Comment: 0 (0%)<br>
<br>
CONDITIONS/COMMENTS:<br>
<br>
Peter Shames (Approve with Conditions): This is a complex document that is dealing with what is essentially totally new subject matter for CCSDS, i.e. EDS, using totally new methodology, i.e. ontology. As such it is breaking new ground and introducing the rest
of the community to a whole new set of terms, techniques, and methods.<br>
<br>
Having done some of this work myself I can find my way through it and I understand the intent and the approach. But I have doubts that most other readers in CCSDS will find it easy going. As a result am requesting that there be some thought given to a significant
re-write before this is unleashed upon the rest of the world.<br>
<br>
I find the following major issues:<br>
<br>
1) in many cases it seems that the issues or problems are presented before the motivation and discussion. This leads to a sort of "reverse Polish" reading style being required, probably not optimal. This same issue surfaces in that Sec 2 materials appear in
Sec 3.<br>
<br>
2) There is a lot of what appears to be essential descriptive material that belongs in Sec 2, but that is buried down in sub-sub-section in Sec 3.<br>
<br>
3) The relationships among these different concepts, ontology, terms, EDS, EDS "core" schema, actual EDS in a component, how these are to be defined, managed, and accessed are complex. They deserve a really clear set of descriptions (in sec 2) along with a
set of diagrams that will make the sometimes complex language descriptions more clear.<br>
<br>
4) There are a lot of terms that are used in the body of the text that do not appear in the definitions. There are several references that also are in the same boat. There are also terms and concepts from other SOIS docs that should be defined as references
from those docs. And lastly, there are some definitions for terms that are either not "crisp" or that do not read as clearly and unambiguously as they might.<br>
<br>
5) There is a set of topics that are stated using requirements "shall" language that appear under "general" headings that might normally be thought of as non-normative. There are also a number of requirements that are collected under a single heading instead
of being individual.<br>
<br>
A whole set of detailed comments is inserted in the attached mark-up.<br>
<br>
Peter<br>
<br>
Mario Merri (Approve Unconditionally): During the Agency Review the relationships with the CCSDS XTCE and CCSDS M&C Services shall be clarified and described in the book. To this effect more detailed RIDs will be raised by the SM&C WG.<br>
<br>
Bigette Behal (Approve Unconditionally): During the Agency Review the relationships with the CCSDS XTCE and CCSDS M&C Services shall be clarified and described in the book. To this effect more detailed RIDs will be raised by the SM&C WG.<br>
<br>
Erik Barkley (Abstain): Unfortunately I can not provide an adequate review at this time.<br>
<br>
Keith Scott (Approve with Conditions): See attached.<br>
<br>
<br>
Total Respondents: 8<br>
No response was received from the following Area(s):<br>
<br>
MOIMS<br>
SOIS<br>
<br>
SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS: Approved with Conditions<br>
PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION: Generate CMC poll after conditions have been addressed</blockquote>
<x-sigsep>
<p>Thomas Gannett<br>
+1 443 472 0805</p>
<div id="signature"><!--SIG--><!--/SIG--></div>
</x-sigsep>
<div id="signature"><!--SIG--><!--/SIG--></div>
<div id="signature"><!--SIG--><!--/SIG--></div>
</div>
</div>
</span>
</body>
</html>