[DFDL-WG] DFDL specification v1.0 - full recommendation status

Mike Beckerle mbeckerle.dfdl at gmail.com
Tue Feb 23 11:23:09 EST 2021 

Per thread below, the DFDL spec was reviewed by the OGF Standards Council,
and with two minor changes (which are done) they are moving to publish this
as a full recommendation.

Congratulations to all involved.  Final links will be forthcoming.

I expect there to be some press announcement about this from somewhere.

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl at gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 10:44 AM
Subject: Re: Final DFDL specification - Re: DFDL Public Comment Ended
To: Greg Newby <gbnewby at petascale.org>


Attached is PDF and docx of version 1.0.8.

The only changes are the redraw of figure 2, and I sorted the items in
4.2.2.

Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | Owl Cyber Defense |
www.owlcyberdefense.com
Please note: Contributions to the DFDL Workgroup's email discussions are
subject to the OGF Intellectual Property Policy
<http://www.ogf.org/About/abt_policies.php>



On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 9:33 AM Greg Newby <gbnewby at petascale.org> wrote:

> Thanks, Mike. Appreciate it!
>  - Greg
>
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 7:02 AM Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I'll get these fixed and get you a new PDF and Docx today.
>>
>> Thank you very much.
>>
>> Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | Owl Cyber Defense |
>> www.owlcyberdefense.com
>> Please note: Contributions to the DFDL Workgroup's email discussions are
>> subject to the OGF Intellectual Property Policy
>> <http://www.ogf.org/About/abt_policies.php>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 11:25 AM Greg Newby <gbnewby at petascale.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi, Mike.
>>>
>>> The standards council reviewed this, and was able to discuss during
>>> today's meeting.
>>>
>>> There are only two very minor inquiries:
>>>
>>> Image 2 (p. 20) has some artifacts due to being a bitmap-type image. If
>>> you still have the source for this, we wondered whether a higher resolution
>>> version might be generated. In particular, there are some greyish
>>> background artifacts behind 0..1, the shaded boxes, and perhaps some other
>>> locations. It looks worse in the PDF, but this is also visible in the
>>> .docx.  If the source is no longer easily available, it's ok to leave this
>>> as-is.
>>>
>>> 4.2.2 information items: It was noted that the items listed here are not
>>> in alphabetical order. Is that intentional? Much of it is in alpha order,
>>> but not the whole list.
>>>
>>> These are very minor comments. Overall, the document is excellent. Well
>>> written and complete, and full due attention to the public comments.
>>>
>>> Let me know about the two items above. No further review is needed, and
>>> once you confirm/provide any final document, I will get it published &
>>> announced, and the obsolescence handled, in fairly short order.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>   Greg
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 10:34 AM Greg Newby <gbnewby at petascale.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi, Mike. In fact the first discussion happened just today. There will
>>>> be a second discussion on Monday, February 22, because due to time
>>>> constraints the discussion didn't conclude.
>>>>
>>>> There is a very good chance that final approval will occur on Monday.
>>>> It will then take a few days for me to get the document + obsoleted
>>>> document into their final PDF form and online at www.orf.org
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>   Greg
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 10:32 AM Mike Beckerle <
>>>> mbeckerle.dfdl at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Greg,
>>>>>
>>>>> Any word on when the standards council will meet about this?
>>>>>
>>>>> I only nag because there are some other things happening related to
>>>>> DFDL implementations where some press synergy is available depending on
>>>>> time frames.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for any info
>>>>>
>>>>> -mikeb
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | Owl Cyber Defense |
>>>>> www.owlcyberdefense.com
>>>>> Please note: Contributions to the DFDL Workgroup's email discussions
>>>>> are subject to the OGF Intellectual Property Policy
>>>>> <http://www.ogf.org/About/abt_policies.php>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 10:01 AM Greg Newby <gbnewby at petascale.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> This is perfect, Mike, and very much appreciated. I've pinged the
>>>>>> standards council again to set up our next meeting, and otherwise they'll
>>>>>> discuss by email.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hopefully we're just a couple of weeks away from putting this online
>>>>>> as a new document, and obsoleting the old. I appreciate your stewardship
>>>>>> for this document's journey!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>   Greg
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 3:08 PM Mike Beckerle <
>>>>>> mbeckerle.dfdl at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Greg,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Attached is a changes-tracked version containing the changes made
>>>>>>> based on the public review comment period, and final corrections found
>>>>>>> since.
>>>>>>> That one is v1.0.6.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The attached version 1.0.7 has all changes accepted and is the clean
>>>>>>> version for final publication. docx and pdf attached.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The public review comments included several statements of support,
>>>>>>> but these public comments were substantive (links):
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://github.com/OpenGridForum/Editor/issues/16 - a large and
>>>>>>> extensive review
>>>>>>> https://github.com/OpenGridForum/Editor/issues/15
>>>>>>> https://github.com/OpenGridForum/Editor/issues/14
>>>>>>> https://github.com/OpenGridForum/Editor/issues/9
>>>>>>> https://github.com/OpenGridForum/Editor/issues/8
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The first of these was based on an extensive review of the
>>>>>>> specification by Don Brutzman of the US Naval Research Laboratory.
>>>>>>> There are change paragraphs in the attached having to do with the
>>>>>>> other 4 public comments. But with respect to this one extensive review,
>>>>>>> there are many smaller changes, as he pointed out a number of
>>>>>>> English-language issues (use of 1st person and 2nd person, future vs.
>>>>>>> present tense, wrong mood of verbs, etc.) as well as just wording
>>>>>>> improvements, all of which were corrected. Those make up the bulk of the
>>>>>>> smaller changes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | Owl Cyber Defense |
>>>>>>> www.owlcyberdefense.com
>>>>>>> Please note: Contributions to the DFDL Workgroup's email discussions
>>>>>>> are subject to the OGF Intellectual Property Policy
>>>>>>> <http://www.ogf.org/About/abt_policies.php>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 3:04 PM Greg Newby <gbnewby at petascale.org>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi, Mike. Thanks for this. I had a calendar reminder for when
>>>>>>>> public comment ended, but it was right at new years and I missed or
>>>>>>>> neglected it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Indeed, your actions are exactly right: make a final version of the
>>>>>>>> document, based on any input received during the public comment period.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The next step is a final review by the standards council. For this,
>>>>>>>> it is helpful if you can provide either a "track changes" version of the
>>>>>>>> document that was reviewed, or a written summary of the nature of changes.
>>>>>>>> Whichever is easier - the idea is to make it easier for the standards
>>>>>>>> council to know what's changed, based on public comments received.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Once the standards council approves publication, I will proceed to
>>>>>>>> put that online, and update #207 as obsolete (I have the editable version
>>>>>>>> of that, I believe).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The standards council's next meeting isn't scheduled yet. We are
>>>>>>>> trying to identify a new fortnightly meeting time, and hopefully will be
>>>>>>>> meeting by the 2nd week of February. If you can provide some sort of record
>>>>>>>> of changes, as described above, the final review can proceed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks again, and best regards,
>>>>>>>>   Greg
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 3:30 PM Mike Beckerle <
>>>>>>>> mbeckerle.dfdl at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Greg et al.,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We have ended the public comment period on DFDL earlier this
>>>>>>>>> month.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We got some good support statements, and one person gave the spec
>>>>>>>>> a quite thorough review even, which was great.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have edited in changes per the public comments that suggested
>>>>>>>>> edits/improvements.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think we are ready to finalize DFDL v1.0 GFD.240 as an official
>>>>>>>>> OGF Recommendation, and mark the prior GFD.207 as obsolete.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What is next? Do I just send you the pdf and ms-word docx files?
>>>>>>>>> We are just proofreading my final edits and this will be ready.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thank you
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | Owl Cyber Defense |
>>>>>>>>> www.owlcyberdefense.com
>>>>>>>>> Please note: Contributions to the DFDL Workgroup's email
>>>>>>>>> discussions are subject to the OGF Intellectual Property Policy
>>>>>>>>> <http://www.ogf.org/About/abt_policies.php>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/dfdl-wg/attachments/20210223/73587652/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: gwdrp-dfdl-v1.0.8.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 2027662 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/dfdl-wg/attachments/20210223/73587652/attachment-0001.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: gwdrp-dfdl-v1.0.8.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 987049 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/dfdl-wg/attachments/20210223/73587652/attachment-0001.docx>

More information about the dfdl-wg mailing list