Re: Issue Group 5 BALLOT

[Evan Prodromou <evan@outlook.net>]

So, just a process question, here. If I understand the process so far,
it's been like this:

        * We posted a straw man draft to get things going.

        * Discussion on this list and on concalls brought about issues
          that Darren and I captured for the issues list.

        * Member chose to champion those issues, which may be vaguely
          stated, and make them into clear, ballotable statements
          about the use case document itself.

        * They posted those re-written issues to this list, and edited
          them afterwards if people objected to the wording or
          direction.
        
        * If noone objected, the issues they had written went to a
          vote.

        * We voted on each issue, as stated.

I guess I'm just wondering what the "Yes, but..." answers are supposed
to mean for the document we will put out on Monday. In my mind, an
issue that passes the vote should go in or out of the main document as
stated.

It seems that the time to change wording for issues, make further
comment, etc. was during the last two weeks. Once stuff actually got
to ballot, it -should- be in a form that each of us feels comfortably
expresses the issue.

I'd be OK with adding the qualified yeses from Jeff's mail as new
issues, but I don't know how much latitude we have to manipulate the
input once it's been voted on.

~ESP