Dear all, In the last SIG I was charged with undertaking the incorporation of Martin's notes on the issues management procedure document.
The issue is documented here: http://www.cidoc-crm.org/Issue/ID-354-management-of-issues-and-workflow The document was not accepted pending inclusion of Martin's notes. Martin said, "I think the procedure is a bit more varied. In the past, we had published by e-mail several details, which can be summarized as follows, in addition to this well-written text: Anybody can raise an issue in the SIG or via e-mail." GB notes: This is addressed in the paragraph issue raising rights. It is already stated there as you say above. MD says "* It is either an open question or a decidable proposal." GB notes See changes highlighted in yellow in document. Martin says "* An open question should be discussed by e-mail and in the SIG." GB notes See changes highlighted in yellow in document. MD says, "A decidable proposal, published by e-mail latest 5 days before a SIG meeting, can be decided in this SIG, if there is time, or the next SIG. At any time, anybody can ask for e-vote for a decidable proposal, short-cutting the SIG discussion. If there is a veto vote, it must go to the SIG discussion." GB notes: Copied verbatim as per MD request into text under initial issue and proposal formulation section. MD says, "At any time, a decidable proposal may be sent by e-mail or be formulated in the SIG to resolve an issue open for discussion. If it is formulated in the SIG, it cannot be decided in the same meeting, but only in the next meeting or via e-vote." GB notes, This is restating in a different way things that have been said in a slightly different way already in the text. Have taken it to be just additional explanatory material for this communication and not something that would be part of the document. MD says, "Rationale: the whole community must be informed about any proposal to be decided. It needs time to understand the consequences of a decidable proposal. In the SIG, we expect participants to be familiar with the proposal in order to save time, but also that major objections could be raised and published before the meeting so that they can adequately be addressed." GB notes, I assume this is explanatory material for our discussion and not for incorporation in the document. So I edited this document to include Martin's notes and it can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1EruCAFntRPRqh2xDdyDhjm-AO649h8HE/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=115809866274616295104&rtpof=true&sd=true I will also mention there are substantial questions remaining in the comments that we have not addressed the leave large ambiguities in our procedure (quorum, voting rights etc.). Those might also be questions that we wish to formally address before proceeding to any final approval of this draft document. For your consideration. Best, George
_______________________________________________ Crm-sig mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
