From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org  Sun Jun 19 20:39:48 2016
Return-Path: <owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org>
X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom8
Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom8@www.open-std.org
Received: by www.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521)
	id 606653587A8; Sun, 19 Jun 2016 20:39:48 +0200 (CEST)
Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org
Received: from smtp-out-1.tiscali.co.uk (smtp-out-1.tiscali.co.uk [62.24.135.129])
	by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D24B356E4C
	for <sc22wg5@open-std.org>; Sun, 19 Jun 2016 20:39:39 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.1.8] ([212.139.77.201])
	by smtp.talktalk.net with SMTP
	id EhdDbF9CMv713EhdDb0ehO; Sun, 19 Jun 2016 19:39:39 +0100
X-Originating-IP: [212.139.77.201]
To: WG5 <sc22wg5@open-std.org>
From: John Reid <John.Reid@stfc.ac.uk>
Subject: Revision of the Standard
Message-ID: <5766E6E8.9090400@stfc.ac.uk>
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2016 19:39:36 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:43.0) Gecko/20100101
 Firefox/43.0 SeaMonkey/2.40
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfEVXaLsvPvyIZpjhY6/MyxoPbaQ5PqqwWNpAG1/7+9Dx+e5pMMVPIpjrVhE1x3zs6DqM8orypD6ZVs7ZSAZ9rB8EihYo5yj5wbFYQHGK2c1mvQCWBhN/
 w05+jWsN0jEX63LdiWaAzpKgoBYKhf37gHmiF4B0rGgSHn9jly9o6tX+wZCPrBl9jGAOPWIJsRgulGeelmQOvWnjQmYU6HZzxpA=
Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org
Precedence: bulk

Dear all,

The new directives say:

"2.9 Maintenance of deliverables
The procedures for the maintenance of deliverables are given in the 
respective Supplements to the ISO/IEC Directives.

2.10 Technical corrigenda and amendments
2.10.1 General
A published International Standard may subsequently be modified by the 
publication of
— a technical corrigendum;
— an amendment; or
— a revision (as part of the maintenance procedure in 2.9)."

This means that we need to look in the JTC1 supplement for the rules. It 
says

"In JTC 1, NP ballot is not required for the revision or amendment of an 
existing standard or Technical Specification, provided that the 
committee passes a resolution containing the following elements:
1)	target dates;
2)	confirmation of scope (including whether it will be expanded, in 
which case the process for new proposals shall apply); and
3)	project editor(s) if already assigned."

In turn this means that I just have to ask SC22 to pass the relevant 
resolution in September. I would still like to show SC22 our latest 
draft, but I don't think a ballot is needed. Does everyone agree with 
this? If so, item 5.1 of the minutes should be amended.

Best wishes,

John.