[dsdl-discuss] Re: Part 8

> a) No errors in the procedures were raised by national bodies at the
> Amsterdam meeting, and until the procedures are formally changed by the
> secretatiat I am obliged to follow the documented procedures.

I think that we all agree to follow the fifth edition of the directives and
that document does allow FCDs.

> b) The text of 12.6.3.9 clearly invalidates the current draft of Part 4
> draft from FCD ballot.

I think that what I am preparing is going to be sent to the FCD ballot.
Unless the FCD ballot demonstrates that "the text has been stabilised,
consensus has been demonstrated, and the substantial support of the
P-members of the SC has been obtained", it will not become a FDIS.
The result of the FCD ballot may be another FCD or DIS, or (if everything
goes very well) FDIS.

In my understanding of your mail, you appear to claim that FCDs
should have proof of stability, or consensus. I am a bit puzzled.
FDISs are certainly required to show proof of stability and consensus,
but my interpretation of FCDs are different.

In my understanding, in Philladelphia, we agreed to create a FCD
and have the FCD ballot. What does the SC34 reommendation of this
meeting say?

Cheers,

-- 
MURATA Makoto <murata@hokkaido.email.ne.jp>
--
DSDL members discussion list
To unsubscribe, please send a message with the
command  "unsubscribe" to dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org
(mailto:dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org?Subject=unsubscribe)