[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: PAC: Vote: CS 6 (except IPR)
> Jon Bosak wrote: > > > > To: workprocess@lists.oasis-open.org > > Subject: PAC: Vote: CS 6 (except IPR) > > > > Since I need to put this in the draft of the bylaws I promised to > > get out, and since (except for the IPR issue) the language I sent > > out last Sunday seems to be uncontroversial, I'm going to call the > > question on this part while we continue the IPR discussion > > separately. If we can agree on an additional IPR clause, I'll add > > that in later. > > > > Please vote on this as soon as possible by sending mail to the > > list. I will stop taking votes Wednesday evening, but I hope that > > we can get a majority well before then. > > > > Jon > > > > ================================================================== > > > > CS 6. Standards and Languages > > > > OASIS TCs shall be authorized to work in any language they choose. > > The language of reference for a TC shall be declared at the same > > time its meeting schedule is first proposed. Formal actions of > > TCs shall be governed by the same rules regardless of the language > > in which the work is taking place. OASIS shall be responsible for > > certifying compliance with procedural and technical criteria. > > > > A TC that has approved and published a committee specification may > > simultaneously or at some later time recommend that the > > specification be made an OASIS standard. Upon resolution of the > > TC to move the specification forward, its chair shall submit the > > following items to OASIS: > > > > 1. A formal specification that is a valid member of its type. > > > > 2. Appropriate documentation for the specification, written in > > the language of reference. > > > > 3. A clear English-language summary of the specification. > > > > 4. Certification by at least three OASIS member organizations > > that they are successfully using the specification. > > > > 5. An account of votes and comments received in any earlier > > attempts to standardize substantially the same > > specification, together with the originating TC's response > > to each comment. > > > > 6. A pointer to the publicly visible comments archive for the > > originating TC. > > > > [unresolved issue to be decided in Paris: IPR policy for the > > standards process; Terry Allen has said that he intends to > > propose IETF rules] > > > > Thirty days shall be allowed for administrative processing of a > > proposed standard. The proposal shall be submitted to the OASIS > > membership for review at the beginning of the calendar quarter > > immediately following the 30 days allocated for administrative > > review. At the beginning of the next calendar quarter, the > > proposal shall be submitted to the voting members of OASIS, who > > shall have thirty days to return a ballot approving or > > disapproving the proposal. > > > > ["thirty days" has been substituted for an occurrence of "one > > month" in this paragraph per comment from Eduardo.] > > > > The TC that originated the specification may, by formal > > resolution, withdraw the proposed specification at any point after > > it is submitted to OASIS for administrative processing and before > > the end of the voting period. > > > > In votes upon proposed OASIS standards, every OASIS member > > organization shall be entitled to cast one vote. Individual > > members (whether the membership is transferable or > > non-transferable) shall not be entitled to vote in the approval of > > OASIS standards. [new language:] Votes shall be cast by sending > > electronic mail to a publicly archived list created for this > > purpose. Votes may be changed up until the end of the voting > > period. > > > > The results of a vote on a proposed standard shall be provided to > > the membership and to the TC no later than one week following the > > close of the voting period. > > > > If at the end of the voting period at least 10 percent of the > > voting membership has voted to approve the proposed standard, then > > > > a. If no votes have been cast to disapprove the proposed standard, > > it shall become an OASIS standard immediately following the end > > of the voting period. > > > > b. If negative votes amounting to less than 10 percent of the > > voting membership have been cast, the negative votes and > > accompanying comments, if any, shall be forwarded to the > > originating TC for consideration. After notification of the > > results, the TC shall have 30 days to take one of the following > > actions by formal resolution: > > > > 1. direct OASIS to approve the specification as submitted > > despite the negative votes, or > > > > 2. withdraw the submission entirely, or > > > > 3. submit an amended specification, in which case the amended > > submission shall be considered as if it were a new > > submission, except that information regarding previous votes > > and any disposition of comments received in previous votes > > shall accompany the amended submission. > > > > If at the end of the voting period less than 10 percent of the > > voting membership has voted to approve the proposed standard, or > > if at the end of the voting period 10 percent or more of the > > voting membership has voted to disapprove the proposed standard, > > or if the orginating TC upon notification of negative votes takes > > no formal action within the 30 days allocated for consideration of > > the results, then the specification shall not become an OASIS > > standard. This shall not prevent the same or similar > > specification from being submitted again. I vote yes. Lauren
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC