Description
Issue with previous "clarification":
- by allowing the *standardization* – not just the definitions - of concrete component type to be in-scope (“Standardization of a basic set of non-vendor specific, concrete component types,…”) then the charter allows component definitions of specific applications stacks such as some “non-vendor specific” open-source to become TOSCA standards, while possibly competing with vendor-specific ones that cannot get the status of TOSCA standard, the latter thus being at a disadvantage.
- So the new revision here is keeping “concrete component type” definitions in-scope of TOSCA TC activity, but not to become “standards”: they would remain non-normative, as suggested by deliverable #2.
- At the same time, some abstract def of component types (e.g. generic ones such as “DBMS”, “Web Server”, “OS”, etc.) can and should be in-scope to be standardized.
- The term “non-vendor specific” is also too vague and not really helping, according to our legal counsel. So removed here from the "re-clarification".