|
If you think a particular OGC standard should be fast tracked to ISO/TC 211, this is what you need to do. In this table, the person or WG with the idea is described as the “initiator”. The green rows are ‘joint’, the yellow rows are OGC, the red rows are ISO and ISO/TC 211. The process begins at Step 1 for a proposed OGC Standard where ISO/TC 211 would like to participate in development. The process begins at Step 7 for an existing, approved OGC Standard. |
|
Order |
What to do | Who |
|---|---|---|
|
|
Make sure the work will be done under OGC IPR policy (e.g., it’s not an OGC Community Standard) | Initiator |
|
|
Create a new Standards Working Group (SWG) or a new Task under an existing SWG | Initiator |
|
|
Draft the candidate Standard and run through OGC Architecture Board (OAB) and OGC Naming Authority review | Initiator |
|
|
OGC will run a 30-day OGC member and public review of the candidate Standard | OGC TC Chair |
|
|
Resolve any comments | Initiator |
|
|
Present the candidate Standard to the OGC Technical Committee (TC) (at an OGC Member Meeting plenary or via webinar) | Initiator |
|
|
TC decides whether to open a vote | OGC TC |
|
|
OGC TC 45-day vote | OGC TC |
|
|
Resolve any comments | Initiator |
|
|
Planning Committee (PC) final approval (at PC meeting or via email) | OGC TC Chair |
|
|
Present / discuss at JAG (could be parallel with 4-7 above) | Initiator |
|
|
Write an ISO Form 4, noting the desire to move straight to DIS and naming the project leader | Initiator |
|
|
Include the document | |
|
|
Include UML, XML, ontologies as appropriate | |
|
|
Note on the form what sort of experts are wanted for the project team, e.g. whether UML, XML, ontologies are involved, as well as the domain | |
|
|
In parallel with 8, get any UML, XML and ontologies reviewed by HMMG, XMG, and GOM respectively | Initiator |
|
|
ISO/TC 211 Committee Manager will run a 30-day New Project fast track ballot; | ISO/TC 211 CM |
|
|
At least five P-members have to nominate experts (can include the project leader) | ISO/TC 211 |
|
|
Project team: resolve any comments; repeat? | Project team |
|
|
ISO/TC 211 publish (to members) the resolution of comments | ISO/TC 211 CM |
|
|
If there are technical comments here, resolve them with the OGC WG. OGC generally collates any changes into a corrigendum | Initiator |
|
|
ISO/CS will run a 12-week DIS (enquiry) ballot | ISO |
|
|
Check the DIS ballot text! | Project lead |
|
|
This is preceded by an 8-week translation period for ISO members. | |
|
|
Editing Committee (invited experts from the working group + project team) resolve comments as above | ISO/TC 211/WG Convenor + Project lead |
|
|
ISO/TC 211 Committee Manager: send “text for publication” to ISO | ISO/TC 211 CM |
|
|
If and only if there are technical changes as a result of 11: ISO/CS will run a 8-week FDIS ballot | ISO |
|
|
Check the FDIS ballot text! | Project lead |
|
|
Resolve any (editorial) comments | Project lead |
|
|
Check the ISO/CS editorial work | Project lead |
|
|
If there have been changes (at 10, 11, or 12), OGC process / vote to publish revision or corrigendum | Initiator |
| Contributors |
Chair |
| Changes: | |
| 2022-12-06 | Change row 7 |
| 2022-10-31 | Page created |