[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [election-services] Election Systems and Standards Paper - NISTworkshop
Mary
I must step in and protect David on this. He is only following the lead I have already set. We have already submitted two papers to the NIST workshop along these lines and without any of the features you have said. Drafts
of both were submitted to the TC for comment, so you presumably you would have seen them then, and getting no kick-back from TC members I submitted the first one and David then followed up with my approval for the second one. We didn't hold a formal ballot
to approve them as I didn't see the need for that. So if knuckles need to be rapped here are mine.
Our papers have not yet been selected by NIST for the workshop so they may not see the light of day. If they do then perhaps we would have the opportunity to correct them according to your directions, Certainly any presentations
that we do of then at the workshop, and we have lined up Laurent to do the major talk, then we will follow the party line.
So we need to go into damage limitation mode on those papers and I'll talk further with David about these two latest drafts.
Regards
John
From: Mary McRae [mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org] Sent: 26 August 2009 19:14 To: David RR Webber Cc: Joseph Lorenzo Hall; eml; Laurent Liscia Subject: Re: [election-services] Election Systems and Standards Paper - NIST workshop Hi David,
Actually, the email archive will show you as the sender and not the TC; the concern is that if you are actually giving a presentation on behalf of the TC or submitting a white paper on behalf of the TC, it must first be approved by the TC and must be
properly attributed.
Regards,
Mary
On Aug 26, 2009, at 1:56 PM, David RR Webber (XML) wrote:
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]