RE: Three motions

["Weber, Martin S." <martin.weber@nist.gov>]

I'm not certain if that's necessary, but I'm in favor of all three, too (this is probably only necessary for the third but oh well)..

-Martin

________________________________________
From: Weber, Martin S. [martin.weber@nist.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 5:39 PM
To: unitsml@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [unitsml] Three motions

Hello TC,
[this message is to be recorded as part of the asynchronous portion of the January UnitsML OASIS TC meeting]

I do apologize for having these motions so late during the asynchronous portion of the TC meeting, but we might still get them through before the meeting ends tomorrow midnight.

So here we are (rationales below):

1) I move that the "ItemVersionHistory" child element of the "CountedItem" element be moved behind the "ItemSymbol" element.

2) I move that the "UnitVersionHistory" child element of the "Unit" element be moved behind the "QuantityReference" element.

3) I move that if either or both of above motions get seconded and pass, we designate the resulting Schema as a new Committe Specification Draft (please keep in mind that, if this motion also gets seconded, we need a special majority vote, i.e., everybody needs to explicitely voice a "yes" or "no").

[...]