SUO: RE: Draft motion
Title:
Bob et
al
I
support the basis for this motion and will be happy to co-sponsor it once final
text is agreed.
I'd
like to propose three changes ...
1.
Subsititute the term "expect contribution" for "starter document" - we should
(hopefully) be getting past the point of needing to *start* the technical
activity of developing an SUO, and a more general/neutral term is needed for
documents that are recognized as inputs presented to the SUO working group
without any flavor of the content of those documents being accepted or "blessed"
by the group.
2.
Delete the last sentence - I don't believe that there is a need for a process by
which a single expert contribution has its status raised. Rather, the
process should be one that encourages incorporation of relevant content of the
expert contributions into draft SUO documents developed within this
group.
3. Add
the following:
At
the request of the submitter, any expert contribution may be circulated within
the SUO working group for detailed review and comment, in order to determine
its value as an input to the SUO working group and identify specific technical
content that can be incorporated in, or used as the basis for developing,
working draft(s) of the SUO. The period for such a review shall be 30
days. Members of the SUO working group are strongly encouraged to
participate in these reviews and to submit comments in the form
of:
- technical issues against the content of the expert
contribution
- recommendations for the inclusion of the content of the expert
contribution (in whole or in part) in the
SUO
<end of proposed changes>
Note: I do not pretend to be an expert in IEEE standardization
procedures, and would welcome any help in refining this wording to fit with the
existing process(es) by which working drafts are developed and
approved!
regards
Julian
SUO Members,
Here is a first draft of a
motion to accept all contributions without according any a privileged position
and without requiring a vote. When one or more documents appear to have
developed a large majority of support, then a vote should be held to
determine/confirm the consensus.
RESOLVED: It shall be the policy of the SUO Working Group
(P1600.1) to accept all documents contributed by members as contributions
that may be used in developing a standard for an upper level ontology.
All such contributions shall enjoy an equal status (currently called
"Starter Documents") with all other contributions that are made to the
Working Group. No vote is required or appropriate to accept such
contributions or to grant them equal status. No other indication of
additional status or privilege shall be accorded any contribution unless
there is a consensus of 75% of the voting members that such status should be
granted.
We should probably define "Starter Document" (or
whatever we decide to call it) . I suggest something like "those
documents contributed by members who believe they may be useful in developing
a standard for an upper level ontology".
This is a draft - all
comments are welcome. So are
co-sponsors.
Bob