Re: [802SEC] Should all IEEE 802 drafts coming for sale be a CLEAN file or should they be offered as they come (in the recirculation case, with changes marked)????
Roger B. Marks wrote:
> There is one question I've been wondering about but never remembered
> to ask anyone in 802.3: how do you use the 75% approval rule? Does
> adoption of a document as D1.0 require 75% approval? At that point,
> does any change to it require 75% approval? Or are things handled more
> loosely very early in the process?
When we are at the TF review stage, it takes >=75% to adopt the contents
of a first draft. Any change must then be adopted by >=75%.
We strive to build consensus starting with pre-draft slideware. We
create, review, refine, repeat, winnow, expand, and cull slides until
we reach something that we are willing to adopt by >=75% as a
"baseline" proposal. The idea is to get concensus on the concepts
before focusing on the specifics of the text.
Once we have a suite of baseline slideware, we hand it to a team of
editors to create a first draft. I like to call this first effort
D0.X. At this point, the document hasn't been adopted in text form,
so it takes a >=75% vote to adopt it. From then on, changes take a
>=75% vote, until you reach a formal balloting step. On the initial
WG ballot, everything is subject to approval. During WG recircs you
vote on the changes (and unresolved negatives, of course). Same
is true on the initial Sponsor ballot, i.e. everything is subject
to approval and change, etc, etc, etc -> submit to RevCom for approval.
It works for us. We have also enjoyed great success in getting our
standards published rapidly. I am very proud to say that the
RevCom submittal version of IEEE P802.3z/D5.0 was so clean and
so well edited (thanks primarily to the efforts of Dr. Howie Johnson,
our editor in chief) that the IEEE immediately made it available
for sale (as the approved standard!) once it was approved by the StB.
To some, all of this preaching from the dot3 crowd may sound
overbearing, and for this I appologize. We take a great deal of
pride in our product, and the process by which it is created.
The idea of *selling* a pre-ballot "draft" to some poor,
unsuspecting member of the general public makes us feel
a bit... unclean.