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

[Chet Ensign <chet.ensign@oasis-open.org>]

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 <robert.griffin@rsa.com> 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