I prefer Kirk's suggestion. On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 1:39 PM Kirk Hall <[email protected]> wrote:
> Another option is to keep with the regular Bylaws numbering, and include a > reference to IPRA in parenthesis: > > > > 5.3.1(a) [Referred to as 5.3.1(1) in IPR Agreement ]: Blah blah > > > > *From:* Public <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Tim Hollebeek > via Public > *Sent:* Thursday, April 25, 2019 1:37 PM > *To:* Wayne Thayer <[email protected]> > *Cc:* CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <[email protected]> > *Subject:* [EXTERNAL]Re: [cabfpub] Bylaws 2.2 Pre-Ballot > > > > I like it. > > > > -Tim > > > > *From:* Wayne Thayer <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Thursday, April 25, 2019 11:22 AM > *To:* Tim Hollebeek <[email protected]> > *Cc:* Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA) <[email protected]>; CA/Browser > Forum Public Discussion List <[email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [cabfpub] Bylaws 2.2 Pre-Ballot > > > > I'd like to propose an alternative that facilitates markdown formatting > and the change to numbers in section 5.3.1: Add the following to the end of > section 5.3.1: > > > > (a) To resolve references to section 5.3.1(a), refer to section 5.3.1(1). > > > > (e) To resolve references to section 5.3.1(e), refer to section 5.3.1(5). > > > > Would this be acceptable? > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 10:30 AM Tim Hollebeek <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I would suggest that this means we need to stick to letters for 5.3.1 for > now, and remember to avoid making the same mistake in the future. > > > > -Tim > > > >
_______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
