Re: [802SEC] Ruling on the meaning of "Substantially Complete"
On 18/7/10 11:50 PM, Tony Jeffree wrote:
Your case 2, while ideally giving rise to only 2 further
recirculations, in reality can give rise to more. Every time changes
are made to the document, you open the possibility of the editor
screwing up or the voting population disagreeing with the chosen
change. Even your case 1 is not guaranteed to be a single recirc case;
every time a document is recirculated without change, there is an
opportunity for the voting population and the WG to spot bugs in what
had been agreed up to that point, and for the WG to decide that it is
a smart move to fix them before closing the balloting process. So in
reality, both of your apparently simple cases have the potential to
result in more recirculations than you claim for them.
There is provision for each of the cases that you cite. Specifically,
the conditional approval has been broken in that the "conditions" have
not been met. That means that the package has to be reapproved by the
EC. That is all perfectly appropriate and the way the system is
supposed to work.
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.