some additional thoughts on voting, comments, etc

["Griffin, Robert" <robert.griffin@rsa.com>]

hi -

Valerie and I wanted to follow up on her earlier email about votes/comments with a couple of additional clarifications:

- When we in the TC vote on a proposal, what gets accepted or rejected is what is in that proposal.  So if there is anything that a TC member feels is not acceptable, incomplete or ambiguous, the member has to decide whether those concerns are serious enough to reject the proposal.

- Comments are always allowed and welcome, whether on a yes, no or abstain. But there isn't any mechanism for a "yes, as long as such and such is changed".

- in order to improve the likelihood of a proposal being accepted, the proposal should be complete amd unambiguous. One corollary of this is that it's in everyone's interest to help proposers by all of us reviewing proposals carefully when they're brought forward, rather than waiting until the ballot.

- Proposals should not require interpretation, writing or re-writing by the editors, who should ne able to ct and paste a proposal into the appropriate docs.

- in a group as large and active as our TC, there will be honest disagreements about proposals. (That's an important reason why, according to the rules of procedure, anyone can bring forward a motion at (in general) any time.) As co-chairs, we welcome energetic discussion as helping us all to achieve the best possible PKCS #11 standard.  

From both of us, thanks again to everyone for all the work that folks are doing!

regards,

Valerie / Bob