<span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">Dear Margherita,</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">please find below the
comments from MOIMS. Since I am sure there will be the need for at least
another iteration, I did not bother consolidating the comments.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial"><b>Comments from MOIMS</b></span>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">MOIMS-1. General: Not
clear what the difference is between the sheet "Agency or Org"
and the one "Consolidated Comments", they seem to be identical.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">MOIMS-2. Sheet "General
Instructions" Item 5: I do not understand it. I assume this describes
the work to be done by the "Agency/Organization RID Coordinator"
of item 4. It is irrelevant to prescribe how the review is conducted internally
to an agency. The bottom line is that any agency has to provide a consolidated
list of valid RIDs.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">MOIMS-3. I assume that
the WG will go through all received RIDs and dispose all of them. To do
this, the WG will assign a disposition status in the column "J"
by using the short definitions in the General Instructions sheet (this
will allow sorting/searching for RIDs with a given status). Please note
that the terminology used is confusing. For instance "Concur: Reviewer
agrees with the recommended change or overall evaluation" should read
"Concur: WG agrees with the recommended change or overall evaluation".
The WG will use column "K" to comment or specify the proposed
implementation for that particular RID. Please improved the General Instructions.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">MOIMS-4. Once the WG
has disposed all RIDs, it is a requirement of the CCSDS that the dispositions
are agreed by the originating RID author. Please add 2 new columns with
a flag (Agreed/Not Agreed) and an associated comment.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial"><b>Comments from MOIMS/NAV</b></span>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">NAV-1. I think doing
RIDs via spreadsheet (like this) will be inefficient and error prone, however,
implementation of the method will be fast, flexible, and inexpensive compared
to an online application.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">NAV-2. I assume that
doing RIDs via this vehicle will replace ALL other current methods (there
are 3: online tool, MS Word doc, ASCII doc). Replacing the old methods
with a single standard vehicle for collecting comments will be good, and
fitting for a standards organization.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">NAV-3. At the top of
the two worksheets for RIDs (i.e., not the instructions), there are lines
for "RID TITLE" and "RID SHORT TITLE". These are meaningless
for a form that by default has spaces for 50 RIDs. I think these two fields
can therefore be removed. </span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">NAV-4. The "Review
Team Disposition" in the two worksheets for RIDs should be filled
in by a pull down selector to facilitate ease-of-use and ensure consistency.
</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">NAV-5. Instruction
#3 refers to a "General Comments" column... but there is no such
column. I suspect this is supposed to be "Supporting Analysis"
(?).</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">NAV-6. I think the
instructions for "Duplicate" are not clear, and I also think
that this categorization is not necessary. The agencies that submit RIDs
via this form will not have access to the forms filed by other agencies,
so would not have a context to understand the identification of "the
Consolidated Comment # (Column H) of the dispositioned comment in the Rationale
Column". Since this operation will already be heavily oriented towards
copy/paste, the Disposition ("Concur...", "Non-Concur",
"Not Applicable", and "Defer"), and the Rationale for
the Disposition can be copied from the form for Agency #1 to the forms
for Agency #2...#N.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">NAV-7. The Overall
Review Coordinator could have difficulty processing the RIDs because spreadsheets
are infinitely flexible, and it seems very likely that different agencies
might introduce local modifications to the sheets that could make them
hard to consolidate. We've already seen such things with the WG report
Powerpoint templates.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial"><b>Comments from MOIMS/SM&C</b></span>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">Agency or Org Tab.</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">SM&C-1. No need
for RID Title and RID Short Title in header area.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">SM&C-2. Need to
add a RID Title as a column used for each RID.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">SM&C-3. Should
also allow for the submittal of a full document with track changes turned
on for cases where there is a very thorough review.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">SM&C-4. Editorial,
Technical, General are the choices for Category. In the instructions
it changes to Technical Fact, Recommended, or Editorial and it is called
Comment Type. Why the difference?</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">Consolidated Tab.</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">SM&C-5. Same comments
as above, plus . . .</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">SM&C-6. If three
different Agencies each submit ten RIDs, won’t there be 10 #1’s, 10 #2’s,
etc.? Need a column on the far left for Agency/Organization. So
we can have RID numbers like NASA-1, ESA-1, ESA-2, etc.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">General Instructions
</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">SM&C-7. Keep it
simple. I don’t need to be told to work left to right starting at
the top.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial"><b>Comments from MOIMS/DAI</b></span>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">Presumably the idea
is that an Agency or Organisation (I’ll use Agency below for brevity)
collects RIDS in a spreadsheet like the one labelled “Agency or Org”
and these are reviewed by an Agency Review Team which produces a spreadsheet
of Agency Consolidated RIDs like the one labelled “Consolidated Comments”.
All the “Consolidated Comments” spreadsheets from the Agencies
are collected by the WG and the WG Review Team makes responses to the originator
(copied to the Agency team) and proposes dispositions. Our experience is
that there is likely to be some negotiation and eventually a disposition
is agreed (e.g. </span><a href="http://review.oais.info/show_bug.cgi?id=21"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">http://review.oais.info/show_bug.cgi?id=21</span></a><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">).</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">DAI-1. It seems to
me that the spreadsheets are more a summary mechanism rather than the mechanism
for reaching consensus – if that is correct then that is probably OK.
But there are a number of things missing if it to act as a mechanism to
pass information from an Agency to a WG.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">DAI-2. Contact details
must be provided so that the WG Review Team can negotiate with the originator
of the RID (or whoever produced the consolidated RID).</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">DAI-3. The numbering
of the RIDs should be distinct e.g. adding Agency abbreviation</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">DAI-4. It should be
possible to add attachments, which could be done by putting in URLs –
but should there be a standard place to put them?</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">DAI-5. Suggest a column
“Rationale for the requested change”. Not the same as “Supporting
Analysis” which should probably be retained as support to the rationale.
Rationale should be required, supporting analysis should be optional.
</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">DAI-6. Instructions
(definitions) say Technical/Recommended/Editorial, but the spreadsheet
pull-down says Editorial/Technical/General. Which is it? </span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">DAI-7. “Organization”
should be a pull-down that lists all agencies and centers (just like the
registration system), PLUS one blank for people to fill in an “other”
organization. Here’s a tip. </span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">DAI-8. The definitions
need significant clarifications/re-writes. </span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">DAI-9. There should
be a place to indicate that the originator of the RID agrees with the disposition.
DAI uses Concur to indicate that the originator of the RID agrees
with the final disposition (e.g. </span><a href="http://review.oais.info/show_bug.cgi?id=24"><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">http://review.oais.info/show_bug.cgi?id=24</span></a><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">).
By the way, I thought that the Technical Editor needed to see some proof
that consensus had been reached.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">DAI-10. Something that
we had an issue with previously was that much of the discussion normally
occurred in an email trail which is not visible. It is a pity that CCSDS
cannot support an on-line system – I think several WGs use systems based
on Bugzilla. That would certainly enable us to make discussions more visible.
Also using spreadsheets seems to involve a great deal of manual copy/paste.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">DAI-11. It might make
life easier if a check is done to ensure some level of compatibility with
an ISO review system which avoids lots of copy/pasting.</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">Regards,</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial">__Mario</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:9pt;color:#800080;font-family:sans-serif">-----
Forwarded by Mario Merri/esoc/ESA on 05/02/2018 17:30 -----</span>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:9pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:sans-serif">From:
</span><span style=" font-size:9pt;font-family:sans-serif">Margherita.di.Giulio@esa.int</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:9pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:sans-serif">To:
</span><span style=" font-size:9pt;font-family:sans-serif">cesg@mailman.ccsds.org</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:9pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:sans-serif">Date:
</span><span style=" font-size:9pt;font-family:sans-serif">31/01/2018
14:58</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:9pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:sans-serif">Subject:
</span><span style=" font-size:9pt;font-family:sans-serif">[CESG]
Fw: RID template in excel format - for comments</span>
<br><span style=" font-size:9pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:sans-serif">Sent
by: </span><span style=" font-size:9pt;font-family:sans-serif">"CESG"
<cesg-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org></span>
<br>
<hr noshade>
<br>
<br>
<br><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif">Dear All,</span><span style=" font-size:12pt">
</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
last week I issued my first e-mail to the CESG members and... I took
a wrong distribution list.</span><span style=" font-size:12pt"> </span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
I am now resending that e-mail, hoping to use the right list this time.</span><span style=" font-size:12pt">
<br>
</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
It;'s about a RID Template that has been requested by CMC at the
last meeting in Darmstadt, and which has been prototyped by David.</span><span style=" font-size:12pt">
</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
Please see further details in the attached e-mail. </span><span style=" font-size:12pt"><br>
</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
Please address that with your WGs, and let me have your comments, if any,
by 5th February. I will then be able to report on that at the CMC Telecon
on 7th February.</span><span style=" font-size:12pt"> <br>
</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
Thanks, and kind regards,<br>
Margherita</span><span style=" font-size:12pt"> <br>
<br>
</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
--------------------------------------------------------------</span><span style=" font-size:8pt;color:#00a1e0;font-family:Verdana"><b><br>
Margherita di Giulio</b></span><span style=" font-size:12pt"> </span><span style=" font-size:8pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:Verdana"><br>
Data Systems Infrastructure Division (OPS-GI)</span><span style=" font-size:12pt"><br>
</span><span style=" font-size:8pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:Verdana"><b><br>
European Space Agency ESA/ESOC</b><br>
Robert-Bosch-Str. 5<br>
D-64293 Darmstadt - Germany<br>
Tel: +49-6151-902779<br>
e-mail: Margherita.di.Giulio@esa.int</span><span style=" font-size:9pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
</span><span style=" font-size:12pt"><br>
</span><span style=" font-size:9pt;color:#800080;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
----- Forwarded by Margherita di Giulio/esoc/ESA on 31-01-18 14:43 -----</span><span style=" font-size:12pt">
<br>
</span><span style=" font-size:9pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
From: </span><span style=" font-size:9pt;font-family:sans-serif">Margherita
di Giulio/esoc/ESA</span><span style=" font-size:12pt"> </span><span style=" font-size:9pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
To: </span><span style=" font-size:9pt;font-family:sans-serif">CESG
<cesg-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org></span><span style=" font-size:12pt">
</span><span style=" font-size:9pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
Date: </span><span style=" font-size:9pt;font-family:sans-serif">26-01-18
14:57</span><span style=" font-size:12pt"> </span><span style=" font-size:9pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
Subject: </span><span style=" font-size:9pt;font-family:sans-serif">RID
template in excel format - for comments</span><span style=" font-size:12pt">
<br>
</span>
<hr noshade><span style=" font-size:12pt"><br>
</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
Dear All,</span><span style=" font-size:12pt"> </span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
at the last CMC Meeting it has been proposed to change the RID template
to an excell format. This would provide the possibility to filter
according to some criteria, e.g. by section, or by author, etc.</span><span style=" font-size:12pt">
</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
David has produced such template, which the CESG shall evaluate and comment.</span><span style=" font-size:12pt">
</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
Please take a look and let me have your comments by 5th February c.o.b.</span><span style=" font-size:12pt">
</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
I will then report on this topic at the CMC telecon .</span><span style=" font-size:12pt">
<br>
</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
Note: in the table, one RID shall be entered per row, starting at
row 6 of the excell.</span><span style=" font-size:12pt"> </span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
Rows 4 and 5 of the table presently contain the "RID
title ", "RID Short Title", the "Review Date"
and the "Disposition Date" . However , this will be changed
- such that every row ( that is, every RID) will have its own Title,
short Title, Review Date and Disposition Date - by means of additional
columns.</span><span style=" font-size:12pt"> </span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
This is a known issue, so please do not comment on that. .</span><span style=" font-size:12pt">
<br>
</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
Kind regards,<br>
Margherita</span><span style=" font-size:12pt"> <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</span><span style=" font-size:10pt;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
------------------------------------------------------</span><span style=" font-size:8pt;color:#00a1e0;font-family:Verdana"><b><br>
Margherita di Giulio</b></span><span style=" font-size:12pt"> </span><span style=" font-size:8pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:Verdana"><br>
Data Systems Infrastructure Division (OPS-GI)</span><span style=" font-size:12pt"><br>
</span><span style=" font-size:8pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:Verdana"><b><br>
European Space Agency ESA/ESOC</b><br>
Robert-Bosch-Str. 5<br>
D-64293 Darmstadt - Germany<br>
Tel: +49-6151-902779<br>
e-mail: Margherita.di.Giulio@esa.int</span><span style=" font-size:9pt;color:#5f5f5f;font-family:sans-serif"><br>
</span><span style=" font-size:12pt"><br>
</span>
<br><tt><span style=" font-size:12pt">This message and any attachments
are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only.<br>
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole
or in part) of its<br>
content is not permitted.<br>
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete
it from your system.<br>
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.<br>
<br>
Please consider the environment before printing this email.<br>
<br>
</span></tt>
<br><tt><span style=" font-size:10pt">_______________________________________________<br>
CESG mailing list<br>
CESG@mailman.ccsds.org<br>
</span></tt><a href="https://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cesg"><tt><span style=" font-size:10pt">https://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cesg</span></tt></a><tt><span style=" font-size:10pt"><br>
</span></tt>
<br><PRE>This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only.
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its
content is not permitted.
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system.
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
</PRE>