RE: Rough language for CT 1-7

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

> The OASIS committee taxonomy would then look something like this:
>
>    1. Board of directors (Article 3)
>       a. Executive committee of the board (Article 5 Section 1)
>       b. Advisory committees of the board (Article 5 Section 2)
>          (i) Subcommittees of advisory committees (RRO per
>              Art. 5 Sect. 3 by implication)
>    3. Ordinary committees of the membership
>       (RRO per Article 13 by implication)
>       a. Special (select, ad hoc) committees (RRO)
>       b. Standing committees (RRO)
>       c. Committees of the whole (RRO)
>    4. Technical Committees (new Article of the bylaws)
>       a. Ordinary technical committees (TCs, new article)
>          (i) Subcommittees of TCs (RRO per the new article)
>       b. Joint committees (JCs, new article)
>          (i) Subcommittees of JCs (RRO per the new article)


Too many! Will we use all of these? Do we need a distinction between
Ordinary committees (3 above) and Technical Committees (4)? We can tweak the
RROR operating rules for various types, so we don't need to create a new
type (4) just because it doesn't fit exactly what RROR says (3) does.

How about:

	1.Board
		a. executive comm
		b. advisory comm
			(i) subs
	2. Ordinary
		a. special = ordinary tech committee
			(i) subs
		b. special = joint tech committee
			(i) subs
		c. standing = maintenance


</karl>