RE: Suggested language for CS 6

["Karl Best" <kfbest@earthlink.net>]

> Thirty days shall be allowed for administrative processing of a
> proposed standard.  The proposal shall be submitted to the OASIS
> membership for a vote at the beginning of the calendar quarter
> immediately following the 30 days allocated for administrative
> review, and all votes shall be due at the end of that calendar
> quarter.  The TC that originated the specification may, by formal
> resolution, withdraw the proposed specification at any point
> during the quarter in which voting is taking place on the
> specification.
>
>    [Note to friendly amenders: I believe that this is what we
>    decided in discussion, but I am not sure that this is what we
>    intended to decide.  I am troubled by the case where the
>    proposal is submitted December 2, ends its administrative month
>    January 2, is posted for a vote at the beginning of the next
>    calendar quarter -- i.e., April 1 -- and finishes its vote June
>    30.  Seven months minus a day is a long time.  Would it not be
>    better to make every month a quarter boundary?  Then the
>    passage would read:
>
>       Thirty days shall be allowed for administrative processing
>       of a proposed standard.  The proposal shall be submitted to
>       the OASIS membership for a vote at the beginning of the
>       calendar month immediately following the 30 days allocated
>       for administrative review.  The voting period shall last
>       three calendar months, with all votes due at the end of the
>       third calendar month after submission of the proposal for a
>       vote.  The TC that originated the specification may, by
>       formal resolution, withdraw the proposed specification at
>       any point during the three months in which voting is taking
>       place on the specification.]

The comment was made (by Ken, I believe) that having a regular quarterly
schedule would give incentive for making submissions on time. i.e. if the TC
is aware of the schedule, they will make the effort to get their submission
in 31 days before the start of the quarter so that they will wait four
months instead of seven.

We also decided, after input from myself, that batching submissions every
quarter would be easier on the process administrator than having submissions
every month, each on their own quarterly schedule, which is what you propose
in the ammended paragraph.

</karl>