decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


To read comments to this article, go here
How NBs can register a changed vote on OOXML - and a Chart of Directives Changes
Friday, March 07 2008 @ 02:43 PM EST

Alex Brown has now posted instructions for national bodies, or NBs, who want to change their September votes, in a comment answering a question from Bob Sutor:
Bob Sutor
2008-03-06, 14:49
Alex,
Could you please list the explicit instructions that a national body should follow in order to let JTC1/ISO/IEC know that the country has changed its vote on OOXML/DIS 29500? Is it an online action or are they supposed to send email to someone? Thanks.
Bob Sutor
IBM...

Administrator (Alex Brown)
@Bob, I believe FAQ item 6.3 answers your question. There is more detail on the SC 34 Home Page. Note the deadline is midnight CET on 29 March 2008.
Alex

Sutor has posted the information also, and he adds this detail:

Keith Brannon mentioned to me in an email that it is essential that the person letting him know of a change in vote be an official designated national body representative and not someone else.

Yes, they can change their vote to No from Yes or Abstain.

Here's what you'll find on the SC 34 home page, and I've highlighted the part he didn't mention in his comment:

DIS 29500 BRM:

* ... Within 30 days after the BRM, national bodies voted in the 2 September ballot may change their vote from any of “approve”, “disapprove” or “abstain” to any of “approve”, “disapprove” or “abstain”. Any NB wishing to change its vote must inform ITTF (brannon@iso.org) of this intention and confirm the intention in writing.

In accordance with the JTC 1 Directives, the progress of the specification will depend on the revised status of all previously-received votes after the BRM.

Please see SC 34 N 932: Frequently Asked Questions regarding DIS-29500 Ballot Resolution Meeting for more details.

That indicates to me that an email is NOT enough. Since they seem to ignore all rules that don't help Microsoft and insist religiously on those that do, I'd assume that style will continue and that they will insist on every jot and tittle of these instructions to the letter. That means being careful that the right person sends the email and then confirms it in writing in snail mail.

Now, I've earlier noticed that this FAQ is not identical in all respects, as I read it, with the Directive [PDF] Brown wrote he was following -- for example, in regard to who gets to vote at the BRM -- and it seems to be written specially for this particular process, and while I'd assume the Directive would legally trump an interpretive FAQ, since they cite the FAQ for how to register a changed vote, here's the info from the FAQ, and hopefully it matches the Directive:

After the meeting

5.1 Is there a further ballot on the DIS 29500 text after the BRM?

No. The BRM is the end of the formal scrutiny process and there is no further balloting, formal deliberation or revision.

5.2 How long will NBs have after the meeting to inform ITTF of a changed vote?

If a NB wishes to modify its vote from that of the 2 September ballot, it must inform ITTF within 30 days of the end of the BRM. At this time, ITTF will re-tally the votes and the fate of DIS 29500 will be decided.

Voting

6.1 In what circumstances may NBs change their vote from that of 2 September?

NBs may change their vote if the BRM agrees to amend the text of the DIS in any way.

6.2 In what ways may an NB change its vote?

NBs that voted in the 2 September ballot may change their vote from any of “approve”, “disapprove” or “abstain” to any of “approve”, “disapprove” or “abstain”.

6.3 What is the mechanism for changing a vote?

Any NB wishing to change its vote must inform ITTF of this intention and confirm the intention in writing.

6.4 Why must countries inform ITTF and not JTC 1?

Because ITTF is responsible for administering the voting of NBs on FDISs and DISs.

6.5 What voting status will NBs have?

For voting at the BRM, and in the ongoing DIS 29500 ballot the voting status (either “P” member or “O” member) is fixed as per the result of the 2 September letter ballot.

6.6 Who are “P” members for the purposes of voting?

In all voting on the DIS 29500 fast track, “P-members” means P-members of JTC 1 (who voted as such in the 2 September ballot), not P-members of SC 34 or any other ISO/IEC committees.

6.7 What criteria may NBs use in deciding whether (or not) to switch their votes?

No constraints are placed upon the criteria NBs may use for deciding their voting position....

6.10 If a NB expert did not participate in the BRM, may this NB subsequently change their vote?

All ISO/IEC JTC 1 NBs will receive the results of the BRM immediately after the meeting. Upon review of the BRM results, any NB that voted in the 2 September ballot may change their vote, whether or not their expert(s) attended the BRM.

If anyone can find identical instructions in the Directive, I'd appreciate if you'd let me know. I've read it several times, and I am not able to do so. But, in any case, according to this, NBs are to inform ITTF, not JTC 1. And there are no constraints. Whatever way an NB voted in September, they can change it to anything they please.

Update: There is a report now, put out by Microsoft employee Doug Mchugh on his blog that the V1 Technical Committee that advises INCITS has voted to recommend approval of OOXML. INCITS still has to endorse. You'll recall that there was a flipflop back in August before the first vote, after a July vote against approval, and after some heavy Microsoft lobbying and some stacking of the deck. Speaking of flipflopping, Patrick Durusau, who recently did that himself regarding OOXML, is on the V1 committee. So this is not a surprise. [End update.]

PolR has done a helpful chart of three versions of the Directive. It's a fascinating project, because in the latest Directive, it notes on the first page that recent changes are in purple, and earlier changes are in blue or red. But section 13, all about fast tracking, is completely in purple, which, it turns out, distorts the reality, making the actual changes harder to spot.

That's what Groklaw is for, of course. He compares:

  • Edition 5 version 3 current since 2007-04-05
  • Edition 5 version 2, effective 2006-04-12
  • Edition 4

Edition 4 has no date, but metada indicates the last modification was July 30, 1998. If you note any errors, please let me know, so we can be positive we have it right. Of course, for anything that matters, go by the original PDFs, which you can find here. Here is the comparative chart in ODF format, and you can download it. And here it is in plain text:

*****************************



Edition 4

Edition 5 version 2, identical to

Edition 5 version 1 according to ISO

Edition 5 version 3


No date in the text

metadata indicates last modification is July 30th 1998

version 1: 2006-03-06

version 2: 2006-04-12

2007-04-05




13 Preparation and Adoption of International Standards - Fast-Track Processing

13 Preparation and Adoption of International Standards - Fast-Track Processing

13 Preparation and Adoption of International Standards - Fast-Track Processing

13.1 Any P member of JTC 1 or organization in Category A liaison with JTC 1 may propose that an existing standard (or amendment with the approval of the responsible SC) from any source be submitted without modification directly for vote as a DIS (or DAM). The criteria for proposing an existing standard for the fast-track procedure is a matter for each proposer to decide.

13.1 Any P-member of JTC 1 or organisation in Category A liaison with JTC 1 may propose that an existing

standard (or amendment with the approval of the responsible SC) from any source be submitted without

modification directly for vote as a DIS (or DAM). The criteria for proposing an existing standard for the fast-track

procedure is a matter for each proposer to decide.

3.1 Any P-member of JTC 1 or organisation in Category A liaison with JTC 1 (the proposer) may propose that


a) an existing standard from any source be submitted without modification directly for vote as a DIS;

or

b) an existing amendment to a standard, with the approval of the responsible SC, be submitted without modification directly for vote as a DAM.


The criteria for proposing an existing standard for the fast-track procedure is a matter for each proposer to decide.


Prior to submission of a document for fast-track processing, a P member or Category A liaison organization of JTC 1 may request that the document be submitted through the JTC 1 Secretariat to one or more SCs for informal comment or discussion among the interested parties. Any comments on format, technical content, completeness, etc. could be considered by the requester prior to formal submission of the document for fast-track procedure.


Prior to submission of a document for fast-track processing, a P-member or Category A liaison organisation of JTC 1 may request that the document be submitted through the JTC 1 Secretariat to one or more SCs for informal comment or discussion among the interested parties. Any comments on format, technical content, completeness, etc. could be considered by the requester prior to formal submission of the document for fast-track procedure.


Prior to submission of a document for fast-track processing, a P-member or Category A liaison organisation of JTC 1 may request that the document be submitted through the JTC 1 Secretariat to one or more SCs for informal comment or discussion among the interested parties. Any comments on

format, technical content, completeness, etc. could be considered by the requester prior to formal submission of the document for fast-track procedure.


The proposer of a fast-track document is encouraged to make a recommendation concerning the assignment of the document to a given SC. The proposer of a fast-track document shall submit the name of an individual who has agreed to serve as project editor for the fast-track document. This recommendation (or in its absence, the JTC 1 Secretariat's recommendation) shall be circulated to JTC 1 NBs together with the DIS ballot (see Form G12). Separately from its vote on the technical content of the standard, NBs shall be given the opportunity to comment on the specific assignment. However, comments on assignment shall not prejudice the vote on technical content. In cases where the SC assignment is in question or where the fast-track document does not appear appropriate for any existing SC, the JTC 1 Secretariat may perform the duties normally assigned to the SC Secretariat until the final SC assignment is determined. The JTC 1 Secretariat shall ensure that the ballot resolution meeting is open to representation from all affected interests and is convened in a timely manner in keeping with the spirit of the fast-track process.




The proposer of a fast-track document is encouraged to make a recommendation concerning the assignment of the document to a given SC. The proposer of a fast-track document shall submit the name of an individual who has agreed to serve as project editor for the fast-track document. This recommendation (or in its absence, the JTC 1 Secretariat's recommendation) shall be circulated to JTC 1 NBs together with the DIS ballot (see Form G18). Separately from its vote on the technical content of the standard, NBs shall be given the opportunity to

comment on the specific assignment. However, comments on assignment shall not influence the vote on ISO/IEC Directives, 5th Edition Version 2.0, 56 technical content. In cases where the SC assignment is in question or where the fast-track document does not appear appropriate for any existing SC, the JTC 1 Secretariat may perform the duties normally assigned to the

SC Secretariat until the final SC assignment is determined. The JTC 1 Secretariat shall ensure that the ballot

resolution meeting is open to representation from all affected interests and is convened in a timely manner in

keeping with the spirit of the fast-track process.




The proposer of a fast-track document is encouraged to make a recommendation concerning the assignment of the document to a given SC. The proposer of a fast-track document shall submit the name of an individual who has agreed to serve as project editor for the fast-track document. This recommendation (or in its absence, the JTC 1 Secretariat’s recommendation) shall be circulated to JTC 1 NBs together with the DIS ballot (see Form G18). Separately from its vote on the technical content of the standard, NBs shall be given the opportunity to comment on the specific assignment. However, comments on assignments shall not influence the vote on technical content. In cases where SC assignment is in question or where the fast-tract document does not appear appropriate for any existing SC, the JTC 1 Secretariat may perform the duties normally assigned to the SC Secretariat until the final SC assignment is determined. In such cases, the JTC 1 Secretariat shall ensure that the ballot resolution meeting is open to representation from all affected interests and is convened in a timely manner, keeping in mind the spirit of the fast-track process. The proposer of the fast-track document has the right to withdraw the fast-track document from the fast-

track process at any point prior to the initiation of the five month ballot.


[Note: For an existing project which has not yet reached Stage 3 (see 12.1), an SC may suspend the 5-stage process in favor of the fast-track procedure (to be initiated by a P member or a Category A liaison organization of JTC 1) provided that:


  • the SC agrees that the intended fast-track document is suitable to satisfy the requirements of the existing project; and


  • the SC agrees to the use of the fast-track procedure and so notifies JTC 1.]

As described in 12.1 an SC may suspend normal processing in favour of the fast-track procedure (to be initiated

by a P-member or a Category A liaison organisation of JTC 1) provided that:


  • The SC agrees that the intended fast-track document is suitable to satisfy the requirements of the existing project; and


  • The SC agrees to the use of the fast-track procedure and so notifies JTC 1.

As described in 12.1 an SC may suspend normal processing in favour of the fast-track procedure (to be initiated by a P member or a Category A liaison organisation of JTC 1) provided that:


  • The SC agrees that the intended fast-track document is suitable to satisfy the requirements of the existing project; and

  • The SC agrees to the use of the fast-track procedure and so notifies JTC 1.

13.2 The proposal shall be received by the ITTF which shall take the following actions:



  • settle the copyright or trademark situation, or both, with the proposer, so that the proposed text can be freely copied and distributed within ISO/IEC without restriction;

  • assess in consultation with the JTC 1 Secretariat that JTC 1 is the competent committee for the subject covered in the proposed standard and ascertain that there is no evident contradiction with other ISO/IEC standards;

  • distribute the text of the proposed standard (or amendment) as a DIS (or DAM), indicating that the standard belongs in the domain of JTC 1 (see Form G11). In case of particularly bulky documents the ITTF may demand the necessary number of copies from the proposer.

13.2 The proposal for the fast-track procedure shall be received by the ITTF which shall take the following actions:



  • Settle the copyright or trademark situation, or both, with the proposer, so that the proposed text can be freely copied and distributed within ISO/IEC without restriction;

  • Assess in consultation with the JTC 1 Secretariat that JTC 1 is the competent committee for the subject covered in the proposed standard and ascertain that there is no evident contradiction with other ISO/IEC standards;

  • Distribute the text of the proposed standard (or amendment) as a DIS (or DAM), indicating that the standard belongs in the domain of JTC 1 (see Form G12). In case of particularly bulky documents the ITTF may demand the necessary number of copies from the proposer.

13.2 The proposal for the fast-track procedure shall be received by the ITTF which shall take the following actions:



  • Settle the copyright or trademark situation, or both, with the proposer, so that the proposed text can be freely copied and distributed within ISO/IEC without restriction;

  • Assess in consultation with the JTC 1 Secretariat that JTC 1 is the competent committee for the subject covered in the proposed standard and ascertain that there is no evident contradiction with other ISO/IEC standards;

  • Distribute the text of the proposed standard (or amendment) as a DIS (or DAM), indicating that the text of the standard belongs in the domain of JTC 1 (see Form G12). In case of particularly bulky documents the ITTF may demand the necessary number of copies from the proposer.

13.3 The period for combined DIS (or DAM) voting shall be six months. In order to be accepted the document must meet the criteria of 9.6.

13.3 The period for combined DIS (or DAM) voting shall be six months. This shall consist of a 30-day JTC 1 National Body review period followed by a five-month ballot. In order to be accepted the document must meet the criteria of 9.6.

13.3 The period for combined DIS (or DAM) voting shall be six months. This shall consist of a 30-day JTC 1 National Body review period followed by a five-month ballot. In order to be accepted the document must meet criteria 9.6.

13.4 Upon receipt of notification from the ITTF that a document has been registered for fast-track processing, the JTC 1 Secretariat shall inform the Secretariat of the SC recommended for assignment of the project of the fast-track processed DIS (or DAM) number, title, and ballot period dates, and shall send the SC Secretariat a copy of the DIS (or DAM). The JTC 1 Secretariat shall also inform the ITTF of the SC that will deal with the ballot results, in order that the table of replies and any comments accompanying the votes may be sent by ITTF directly to the SC Secretariat as well as to the JTC 1 Secretariat.

13.4 Upon receipt of notification from the ITTF that a document has been registered for fast-track processing, the

JTC 1 Secretariat shall inform the Secretariat of the SC recommended for assignment of the project of the fast-

track processed DIS (or DAM) number, title, and ballot period dates, and shall send the SC Secretariat a copy of

the DIS (or DAM).


If the JTC 1 Secretariat has received any comments during the 30-day review period, the JTC 1 Secretariat shall circulate the comments and the disposition of such comments among the JTC 1 National Bodies for the transparency of the process.


During the 30-day review period, an NB may identify to the JTC 1 Secretariat any perceived contradiction with other JTC 1, ISO or IEC standards.


If such a contradiction is alleged, the matter shall be resolved by the ITTF and JTC 1 Secretariat in accordance

with Section 13.2 before ballot voting can commence. If no contradiction is alleged, the fast-track ballot voting

commences immediately following the 30-day period.


In either case, the ballot voting period shall be five months.


Prior to the start of the ballot, the JTC 1 Secretariat shall also inform the ITTF of the SC that will deal with the ballot results, in order that the table of replies and any comments accompanying the votes may be sent by ITTF directly to the SC Secretariat as well as to the JTC 1 Secretariat.

13.4 Upon receipt of notification from the ITTF that a document has been registered for fast-track processing, the JTC 1 Secretariat shall inform the Secretariat of the SC recommended for assignment of the project of the fast-track processed DIS (or DAM) number, title, and ballot period dates, and shall send the SC Secretariat a copy of the DIS (or DAM).


During the 30-day review period, a NB may identify to the JTC 1 Secretariat any perceived contradiction

with other standards or approved projects of JTC 1, ISO or IEC.


If such a contradiction is alleged, the matter shall be addressed by the ITTF and JTC 1Secretariat in accordance with Section 13.2 before ballot voting can commence. If no contradiction is alleged, the 5 month fast-track ballot voting commences immediately following the 30-day period.


If a contradiction is alleged, the JTC 1 Secretariat and ITTF shall make a best effort to resolve the matter in no more than a three month period, consulting with the proposer of the fast-track document, the NB(s) raising the claim of contradiction and others, as they deem necessary. A meeting of these parties, open to all NBs, may be convened by the JTC 1 Secretariat, if required.


If the resolution requires a change to the document submitted for fast-track processing, the initial document submitted will be considered withdrawn. The proposer may submit a revised document, to be processed as a new proposal.


If the resolution results in no change to the document or if a resolution cannot be reached, the five month fast-track ballot commences immediately after such a determination is made.


The JTC 1 Secretariat shall circulate the comments and the disposition of such comments to JTC 1 National Bodies and the ITTF will include this information with the fast-track ballot for the transparency of the process.


Prior to the start of the ballot, the JTC 1 Secretariat shall also inform the ITTF of the SC that will deal with the ballot results, in order that the table of replies and any comments accompanying the votes may be sent by ITTF directly to the SC Secretariat as well as to the JTC 1 Secretariat.

13.5 Upon receipt of the notification from the JTC 1 Secretariat that its SC has been assigned the responsibility for dealing with a fast-track processed DIS (or DAM), the SC Secretariat shall so inform the SC NBs, and shall make plans for the handling of ballot results through the formation of a ballot resolution group, as follows. The SC Secretariat shall:


  • schedule a ballot resolution group meeting to consider any comments on the DIS (or DAM);


  • appoint a Convener for the ballot resolution group ;


  • appoint a Project Editor for the DIS (see 13.1, third paragraph). The Project Editor shall be responsible for producing the final DIS text in case of acceptance;


  • notify the SC NBs of the ballot resolution group meeting date(s), location, Convener, and Project Editor.


In some cases the establishment of a ballot resolution group is unnecessary and the SC Secretariat can assign the task directly to the Project Editor.

13.5 Upon receipt of the notification from the JTC 1 Secretariat that its SC has been assigned the responsibility

for dealing with a fast-track processed DIS (or DAM), the SC Secretariat shall so inform the SC NBs, and shall

make plans for the handling of ballot results through the formation of a ballot resolution group, as follows. The SC

Secretariat shall:


  • Schedule a ballot resolution group meeting to consider any comments on the DIS (or DAM);


  • Appoint a Convener for the ballot resolution group ;


  • Appoint a Project Editor for the DIS (see 13.1, third paragraph). The Project Editor shall be responsible for producing the final DIS text in case of acceptance;


  • Notify the SC NBs of the ballot resolution group meeting date(s), location, Convener, and Project Editor.


In some cases the establishment of a ballot resolution group is unnecessary and the SC Secretariat can assign

the task directly to the Project Editor.

13.5 Upon receipt of the notification from the JTC 1 Secretariat that its SC has been assigned the responsibility for dealing with a fast-track processed DIS (or DAM), the SC Secretariat shall so inform the SC NBs, and shall make plans for the handling of ballot results through the formation of a ballot

resolution group, as follows. The SC Secretariat shall:


  • Schedule a ballot resolution group meeting to consider any comments on the DIS (or DAM);


  • Appoint a Convener for the ballot resolution group;


  • Appoint a Project Editor for the DIS (see 13.1, third paragraph). The Project Editor shall be responsible for producing the final DIS text in case of acceptance;


  • Notify the SC NBs of the ballot resolution group meeting date(s), location, Convener and Project Editor.


In some cases the establishment of a ballot resolution group is unnecessary and the SC Secretariat can assign the task directly to the Project Editor.

13.6 Upon receipt of the ballot results, and any comments, the SC Secretariat shall distribute this material to the SC NBs. The NBs shall be requested to consider the comments and to form opinions on their acceptability. The SC Secretariat shall also send notification of the ballot resolution group meeting to any NBs having voted to disapprove the DIS (or DAM) that are not NBs of the SC.


Comments received after the normal voting period will not be taken into account, except that they will be submitted to the appropriate SC Secretariat for consideration at the time of the next review of the IS in question.

13.6 Upon receipt of the ballot results, and any comments, the SC Secretariat shall distribute this material to the SC NBs. The NBs shall be requested to consider the comments and to form opinions on their acceptability. The SC Secretariat shall also send notification of the ballot resolution group meeting to any NBs having voted to disapprove the DIS (or DAM) that are not NBs of the SC.


Comments received after the normal voting period will not be taken into account, except that they will be

submitted to the appropriate SC Secretariat for consideration at the time of the next review of the IS in question.

13.6 Upon receipt of the ballot results, and any comments, the SC Secretariat shall distribute this material to the SC NBs, to any NBs having voted that are not members of the SC and to the proposer. The NBs shall be requested to consider the comments and to form opinions on their acceptability. The SC Secretariat shall also send notification of the ballot resolution group meeting to SC NBs, to any NBs having voted that are not members of the SC and to the proposer. Comments received after the normal voting period will not be taken into account, except that they will be submitted to the appropriate SC

Secretariat for consideration at the time of the next review of the IS in question.

13.7 NBs of the relevant SC shall appoint to the ballot resolution group one or more representatives who are well aware of the NB's position. NBs having voted negatively, whether or not an NB of the relevant SC, have a duty to delegate a representative to the ballot resolution group meeting.

13.7 NBs of the relevant SC shall appoint to the ballot resolution group one or more representatives who are well aware of the NB's position. NBs having voted negatively, whether or not an NB of the relevant SC, have a duty to

delegate a representative to the ballot resolution group meeting.

13.7 NBs of the relevant SC shall appoint to the ballot resolution group one or more representatives who are well aware of the NB’s position. NBs having voted negatively, whether or not a NB of the relevant SC, have a duty to delegate a representative to the ballot resolution meeting.

13.8 At the ballot resolution group meeting, decisions should be reached preferably by consensus. If a vote is unavoidable the vote of the NBs will be taken according to normal JTC 1 procedures.

13.8 At the ballot resolution group meeting, decisions should be reached preferably by consensus. If a vote is

unavoidable the vote of the NBs will be taken according to normal JTC 1 procedures.

13.8 At the ballot resolution group meeting, decisions should be reached preferably by consensus. If a

vote is unavoidable the vote of the NBs will be taken according to normal JTC 1 procedures.

13.9 If, after the deliberations of this ballot resolution group, the requirements of 9.6 are met, the Project Editor shall prepare the amended DIS (or DAM) and send it to the SC Secretariat who shall forward it to the ITTF for publication as an IS. For its initial publication, the document is not required to be in ISO/IEC format, but can be published in the format of the submitting organization.

13.9 If, after the deliberations of this ballot resolution group, the requirements of 9.6 are met, the Project Editor shall prepare the amended DIS (or DAM) and send it to the SC Secretariat who shall forward it to the ITTF for publication as an IS. For its initial publication, the document is not required to be in ISO/IEC format, but can be published in the format of the submitting organisation.

13.9 If, after the deliberations of this ballot resolution group, the requirements of 9.6 are met, the Project Editor shall prepare the revised DIS (or DAM) and send it to the SC Secretariat who shall forward it to the ITTF for publication as an IS. For its initial publication, the document is not required to be in ISO/IEC format, but can be published in the format of the submitting organization.

13.10 If it is impossible to agree to a text meeting the above requirements, the proposal has failed and the procedure is terminated.

13.10 If it is impossible to agree to a text meeting the above requirements, the proposal has failed and the procedure is terminated.

13.10 If it is impossible to agree to a text meeting the above requirements, the proposal has failed and the procedure is terminated.

13.11 In either case the Convener, in coordination with the Project Editor, shall prepare a full report which shall be distributed by the SC Secretariat to its NBs and to the ITTF.

3.11 In either case the Convener, in coordination with the Project Editor, shall prepare a full report which shall

be distributed by the SC Secretariat to its NBs and to the ITTF.

13.11 In either case the Convener, in coordination with the Project Editor, shall prepare a full report which shall be distributed by the SC Secretariat to its NBs and to any NBs having voted that are not members of the SC, to the proposer and to the ITTF.

13.12 The time period for these different steps shall be:



  • a total of two months for the ITTF to send the results of the vote to the JTC 1 Secretariat and to the SC Secretariat, and for the latter to distribute it to its NBs;


  • not less than two and one-half months prior to the date of the ballot resolution group meeting for distribution of the voting results and any comments;


  • not later than one month after the ballot resolution group meeting for distributions by the SC Secretariat of the final report and the final DIS text in case of acceptance.

13.12 The time period for these different steps shall be:



  • A total of two months for the ITTF to send the results of the vote to the JTC 1 Secretariat and to the SC Secretariat, and for the latter to distribute it to its NBs;


  • Not less than two and one-half months prior to the date of the ballot resolution group meeting for distribution of the voting results and any comments;


  • Not later than one month after the ballot resolution group meeting for distributions by the SC Secretariat of the final report and the final DIS text in case of acceptance.

13.12 The time period for post ballot activities by the respective responsible parties shall be as follows:


  • Immediately after the vote, ITTF shall send the results of the vote to the JTC 1 Secretariat and to the SC Secretariat, and for the latter to distribute the results without delay to its NBs, to any NBs having voted that are not members of the SC and to the proposer;


  • As soon as possible after the distribution of the results of the vote to its NBs but in not less than two and one-half months the SC Secretariat shall convene a ballot resolution group meeting, if required;


  • In not more than one month after the ballot resolution group meeting the SC Secretariat shall distribute the final report of the meeting and final DIS text in case of acceptance.

13.13 If the proposed standard is accepted and published, its maintenance will be handled by JTC 1.

13.13 If the proposed standard is accepted and published, its maintenance will be handled by JTC 1.

13.13 If the proposed standard is accepted and published, its maintenance will be handled by JTC 1

and/or a JTC 1 designated maintenance group in accordance with the JTC 1 rules.

13.14 Subsequent revisions shall be in the format prescribed by the ISO/IEC Directives - Part 3. In this case, the ITTF editor shall check the text received to ensure that it is in conformance with the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 3. If modifications are considered necessary, the ITTF editor shall submit proposals for modification to the Project Editor for approval. No IS shall be published without such approval.


ITTF shall prepare a proof of the IS and send this to the Project Editor for endorsement. The only changes permissible at this stage are corrections of recognized errors in the revised text or of errors introduced by ITTF in preparing the proof.


Upon receipt of the endorsed proof from the Project Editor, ITTF shall make any final corrections required and proceed with publication of the IS (or amendment).

13.14 Subsequent revisions shall be in the format prescribed by the ISO/IEC Directives Part 2. In this case, the

ITTF editor shall check the text received to ensure that it is in conformance with the ISO/IEC Directives Part 2. If

modifications are considered necessary, the ITTF editor shall submit proposals for modification to the Project Editor for approval. No IS shall be published without such approval.


ITTF shall prepare a proof of the IS and send this to the Project Editor for endorsement. The only changes

permissible at this stage are corrections of recognised errors in the revised text or of errors introduced by ITTF in

preparing the proof.


Upon receipt of the endorsed proof from the Project Editor, ITTF shall make any final corrections required and

proceed with publication of the IS (or amendment).

13.14 Subsequent revisions shall be in the format prescribed by the ISO/IEC Directives Part 2. in this case, the ITTF editor shall check the text received to ensure that it is in conformance with the ISO/IEC Directives Part 2. If modifications are considered necessary, the ITTF editor shall submit proposals for modification to the Project Editor for approval. No IS shall be published without such approval.


ITTF shall prepare a proof of the IS and send this to the Project Editor for endorsement including identification of the changes made. The only changes permissible at this stage are corrections of recognised errors in the revised text or errors introduced by ITTF in preparing the proof.

Upon receipt of the endorsed proof from the Project Editor, ITTF shall make any final corrections required and proceed with publication of the IS (or amendment).







  View Printable Version


Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )