From Miles.Ellis@etrc.ox.ac.uk Thu Jan 23 17:47:09 1997 Received: from oxmail4.ox.ac.uk (oxmail4.ox.ac.uk [163.1.2.33]) by dkuug.dk (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA10448 for ; Thu, 23 Jan 1997 17:47:00 +0100 Received: from ermine.ox.ac.uk by oxmail4 with SMTP (PP) with ESMTP; Thu, 23 Jan 1997 16:42:48 +0000 Received: from [163.1.85.1] (com1.etrc.ox.ac.uk [163.1.85.1]) by ermine.ox.ac.uk (1.1/8.8.3) with ESMTP id QAA19228; Thu, 23 Jan 1997 16:43:48 GMT X-Sender: mellis@ermine.ox.ac.uk Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199701212017.OAA00772@poplar409.cray.com> References: <199701211411.PAA23754@dkuug.dk> from "Miles Ellis" at Jan 21, 97 02:09:15 pm Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 16:47:13 +0000 To: Larry Rolison From: Miles Ellis Subject: Re: Your request for an informal ballot on N1247 Cc: sc22wg5 Larry, > >I would also like you to hold an informal letter ballot on N1247. I >accept the same deadline date. > If you want to hold your own informal ballot, please do so. However, it cannot be an "official" informal ballot run by me. N1243 is a draft CD, produced by the project editor (David Epstein) as a result of several resolutions by WG5, most recently in Dresden when WG5 for the third meeting running confirmed its intention to follow the CoCo route and not the fpp route. The meeting on Wednesday evening is technically a meeting of the Conditional Compilation Development Body, and its main task is to determine what should be done with the current draft (N1243), and to produce draft resolution(s) on that topic. The only full committee time that will be spent on this subject will be during the discussion of these resolutions. (A similar procedure is being followed for the draft Interoperability PDTR). It seems appropriate, therefore, to ensure that as many comments as possible are brought out before the Wednesday evening meeting in order that we can avoid unnecessary repetition (and get to bed before dawn ;-) Your paper is, as I understand it, an alternative proposal to the approach that WG5 has already approved, and what you hope to do is to persuade WG5 to reverse its earlier decisions and adopt your paper as the draft CD. When you and I talked about this in Las Vegas last November, and also by email, I stressed the fact that WG5 had already determined which approach to follow, but also said that you obviously have the right, as does anyone else, to attempt to overturn that decision. I also said that since I anticipated that the Las Vegas meeting would probably have to decide whether to forward the draft CD to SC22 for its first ballot, this meeting was probably the last chance that you, or anyone else, would have to try to change that direction other than through a country vote during the CD ballot. It may well be a good idea for you to solicit input concerning your paper before the meeting, but I hope you will appreciate that this cannot be in the form of an "official" informal ballot since, unlike N1243, your paper is not an "official" draft Standard, produced as a result of due process. Since you sent your request to the whole WG5 list I thought that I should copy my reply to the whole list, so that there would be no misunderstanding. See you in Las Vegas Miles ------------------------------------------------------------ Dr Miles Ellis Director: Educational Technology Resources Centre University of Oxford, 37 Wellington Square, Oxford OX1 2JF, ENGLAND Telephone: +44 1865 270528 Fax: +44 1865 270527 Email: Miles.Ellis@etrc.ox.ac.uk WWW: http://www.etrc.ox.ac.uk/Personal/Miles/Miles_Ellis.html