[Css-csts] Further updates of the SFW Book

[Wolfgang Hell]

Dear CSTS colleagues,

with respect to my note sent on February 7, I managed to close dome of 
the open items listed in that note.

Thanks to Holger the ASN.1 syntax check has been performed. The only 
issues the compiler complained about were two missing OID definitions. I 
have added these missing OIDs and with that the ASN.1 syntactically is 
correct now.

I have performed various spot checks on the document and found and 
corrected some clerical errors. I have uploaded the latest version of 
the SFW to the CWE. You can find it at Cross Support Services Area (CSS) 
<http://cwe.ccsds.org/css>> Documents 
<http://cwe.ccsds.org/css/docs/Forms/AllItems.aspx?View=%7B8045374D-F8E0-4356-83CA-993252A38FE8%7D>> 
CSS-CSTS 
<http://cwe.ccsds.org/css/docs/Forms/AllItems.aspx?RootFolder=%2Fcss%2Fdocs%2FCSS%2DCSTS&View=%7B8045374D-F8E0-4356-83CA-993252A38FE8%7D>> 
CWE Private 
<http://cwe.ccsds.org/css/docs/Forms/AllItems.aspx?RootFolder=%2Fcss%2Fdocs%2FCSS%2DCSTS%2FCWE%20Private&View=%7B8045374D-F8E0-4356-83CA-993252A38FE8%7D>> 
CSTS Framework and Concept. The file name is 921x1r2 20150216.

As discussed at the last telecon, I have generated two documents to 
capture the rationale for most of the changes. The "official" RIDs that 
resulted from the agency review and the proposed dispositions are 
contained in the file "CSTS-SFW-Red-2 proposed RID resolution 20150216" 
which I have uploaded to the same CWE folder as the latest version of 
the SFW. In those cases where the draft disposition text is in red font, 
I think that we should discuss the matter in the CSTS WG to reach a 
final conclusion. I should also draw your attention to two RIDs ((RID 
#27 and RID #46) for which my initial response was to accept them and to 
update the document as proposed. However, after having worked further on 
the document I have changed my mind and my inclination is now to reject 
those RIDs. The modifications that were proposed after completion of the 
official agency review as a Working Group internal activity are 
summarized in the document "CSTS-SFW-Red-2- post agency review RIDs". In 
essence I have captured the associated email correspondence and inserted 
into the text the disposition I'm proposing. When the disposition is in 
blue font, I regard the matter clarified and propose to close the matter 
with the proposed disposition. In those cases where the disposition text 
is in red font, at least the originator of the RID or even the WG as a 
whole should review the matter before we can conclude on how to updated 
the SFW. Unfortunately, there are cases where the discussion threads are 
not cleanly separated, but I believe that the material in the document 
is sufficient to understand what the issue is.

Best regards,
Wolfgang
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/css-csts/attachments/20150216/118286bb/attachment.html>