Bob, please make sure to include the URL to the draft being approved in the ballot language, so that it is clear to outsiders what the TC voted on.
Thanks,
/chet
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Griffin, Robert <> wrote:
Hi –
Since the KMIP V1.1 Differences doc is non-standards track, we have the option of a very simple approach to making it a Committee Note (from the TC Process):
“Non-Standards Track Work Products may directly be approved as Committee Notes by the Technical Committees via a Full Majority vote. Public reviews are optional for Committee Notes”.
We could do this by voice vote, but I think it probably is better to have a ballot so that voting members not in the call have a chance to participate in the ballot. So I suggest we consider something like this in today’s TC call:
“(name) moves that the co-chairs create a 10-day Full Majority Vote ballot to approve ”KMIP V1.1 Differences wd02” asa Committee Note and request the co-chairs to submit a request for OASIS to publish this Committee Note.”
Regards,
Bob
--
/chet
----------------
Chet Ensign
Director of Standards Development and TC Administration
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society
http://www.oasis-open.org
Primary: +1 973-996-2298
Mobile: +1 201-341-1393
Check your work using the Support Request Submission Checklist at http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/47248/tc-admin-submission-checklist.html
TC Administration information and support is available at http://www.oasis-open.org/resources/tcadmin
Follow OASIS on:
LinkedIn: http://linkd.in/OASISopen
Twitter: http://twitter.com/OASISopen
Facebook: http://facebook.com/oasis.open
