[Cesg-all] Results of CESG poll closing 13 April 2012

[CCSDS Secretariat]

CESG E-Poll Identifier:  CESG-P-2012-04-001 
Approval to release CCSDS 521.0-P-1.1,  Mission 
Operations Message Abstraction Layer (Pink 
Sheets, Issue 1.1) for CCSDS Agency review
Results of CESG poll beginning 9 April 2012 and ending 4 May 2012:

                  Abstain:  1 (20%) (Calzolari)
  Approve Unconditionally:  1 (20%) (Peccia)
  Approve with Conditions:  3 (60%) (Shames, Barkley, Scott)
  Disapprove with Comment:  0 (0%)

CONDITIONS/COMMENTS:

      Peter Shames (Approve with 
Conditions):  This version of the MAL introduces 
some new concepts the consequences of which do 
not appear to have been thoroughly thought through.  See attached mark-ups.

The most significant is the notion that 
alternative data type specification languages 
other than those defined in the MAL might be used 
(Sec 4.1.1 and elsewhere).  How do you achieve 
interoperability, or even know what encoding has 
been used, if this sort of free adoption of other 
data type spec languages is allowed?  Shouldn't 
there be some sort of universal config message, 
or MIME type spec, or something else used to 
signal the encoding actually being used?

Other technical and editorial issues have been 
identified in the text, but this one is particularly troubling.

      Erik Barkley (Approve with Conditions):  1) 
Pg 3-1 needs a proper reference (ie fix "...It is detailed in 0.")

2) Pg 4-25 -- the File type has been added and 
MIME type governance is indicated via what 
appears to be descriptive text citing an IANA URL 
(http://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/index.html). 
This should be formally indicated as normative 
(if that is the intent) and properly cited as a controlling reference.

      Keith Scott (Approve with Conditions):  I 
request that the schema for the MAL service 
specification and the 'normative XML for the MAL 
specification' mentioned in section 6 of the Pink 
Sheets be available to Agency Reviewers.

Why is the 'normative XML for the MAL 
specification, validated against the XML schema' 
mentioned in section 6 (nominally to be located 
at 'http://sanaregistry.org/r/malschemas/mal.xsd' 
(nominally) a schema itself?  If this is xml that 
validates against a schema, shouldn't it be an xml file?


Total Respondents:  5

No response was received from the following Area(s):

      SOIS



SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS:  Approved with Conditions
PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION:            Generate 
CMC poll after conditions have been addressed

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
CESG E-Poll Identifier:  CESG-P-2012-04-002 
Approval to publish CCSDS 881.0-M-1,  Spacecraft 
Onboard Interface Services—RFID-Based Inventory 
Management Systems (Magenta Book, Issue 1)
Results of CESG poll beginning 15 April 2012 and ending 4 May 2012:

                  Abstain:  1 (16.67%) (Calzolari)
  Approve Unconditionally:  4 (66.67%) (Peccia, Barkley, Taylor, Scott)
  Approve with Conditions:  1 (16.67%) (Shames)
  Disapprove with Comment:  0 (0%)

CONDITIONS/COMMENTS:

      Peter Shames (Approve with 
Conditions):  This document is about to be 
published as a Magenta Book.  It appears to have 
passed agency review.  In reading through the 
document I find that while it conforms to the OLD 
definition for an Application Profile Magenta 
Book, it actually conforms to the current 
Utilization Profile style of Blue 
Book.  Furthermore, the normative content is 
slight, consisting of exactly pages 3-1 and 
3-2.  The rest of the 44 pages of the document 
are either explanatory Green Book material or boilerplate.

Based on these facts, it would have been 
preferable to publish this as two documents, a 
slim Blue Book and a companion Green 
Book.  However, if there are no other objections 
raised about this from the other CESG members or 
the CCSDS tech editor I am content to approve it 
for publication, with the strong suggestion that 
we be more careful of these issues in the future.

[Position of CCSDS tech editor:  This is an 
instance where a project was well underway when 
the new rules were adopted.  Breaking the book up 
into Blue and Green volumes at this point SHOULD 
necessitate an additional Agency review, the 
benefit of which would seem not to justify the 
resource expenditure.  Therefore unless other 
CESG members feel strongly that the document 
should be recast, the Secretariat will proceed with CMC polling.]

Total Respondents:  6

All Areas responded to this question.



SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS:  Approved with Conditions
PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION:            Generate CMC poll

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
CESG E-Poll Identifier:  CESG-P-2012-04-003 
Approval of Corrigendum 1 to CCSDS 401.0-B-21, 
Radio Frequency and Modulation Systems-Part 1: 
Earth Stations and Spacecraft (Blue Book, Issue 21, July 2011)
Results of CESG poll beginning 15 April 2012 and ending 4 May 2012:

                  Abstain:  3 (42.86%) (Barkley, Taylor, Scott)
  Approve Unconditionally:  4 (57.14%) (Shames, Peccia, Calzolari, Moury)
  Approve with Conditions:  0 (0%)
  Disapprove with Comment:  0 (0%)

Total Respondents:  7

All Areas responded to this question.



SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS:  Approved Unconditionally
PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION:            Generate CMC poll

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg-all/attachments/20120505/a3794fb4/attachment.htm