Re: [kmip] suggested motion on approving the KMIP V1.1 Differences as Committee Note

Tou bet!

Bob

 

From: Chet Ensign [mailto:]

Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 04:27 PM
To: Griffin, Robert

Cc:  <>

Subject: Re: [kmip] suggested motion on approving the KMIP V1.1 Differences as Committee Note

 

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