Re: Committee Draft Errata Approved

[James Bryce Clark <jamie.clark@oasis-open.org>]

     I understand that at Thursday's meeting, the WSDM TC approved revised 
versions of MUWS and MOWS as new Committee Draft specifications of MUWS and 
MOWS.[1]
     I believe that other Technical Committees have followed a similar 
course when they believe that corrections are needed to a completed 
document.  This is because our rules do not permit a retroactive correction 
to change a prior approved work, but do permit adoption of a new revised 
specification.
     As the v1.0 specifications presently are under submission for a vote 
as OASIS Standards, there is some risk of confusion.  I suggest that the 
committee assign a number (such as v1.01) to the 24 February documents so 
as to permit correct references.  The 24 February revisions may be 
described by the committee as corrective, or more recent, if they wish, but 
to be clear, they do not become a normative part of the v1.0 
documents.   If the v1.0 specifications are approved in the pending member 
vote as OASIS Standards, the TC may wish then to consider whether to bring 
the 24 February modifications forward as their own OASIS Standard 
submission, or hold them in queue with other changes for a future major 
version.

     Best regards JBC

~   James Bryce Clark
~   Director, Standards Development, OASIS
~   jamie.clark@oasis-open.org

[1]  http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/wsdm/200502/msg00027.html