[KI-LC] Cheat sheet for Recommendation process

Mark Lizar mark at smartspecies.com
Thu Mar 10 13:31:13 CST 2016

Thanks Eve,

This is awesome cheat sheet - much appreciated !!

- Mark
> On 10 Mar 2016, at 04:42, Eve Maler <eve at xmlgrrl.com> wrote:
> I believe the key sentences in the Operating Procedures are:
> "A Simple Majority of those Voting [in a WG] is required to approve the submission of a Draft Recommendation to the LC for All Member Ballot."
> "When a Draft Recommendation is completed by a Work Group, it is submitted to the Leadership Council for an All Member Ballot. It is the LC’s responsibility to certify that the WG draft is within the scope of the WG charter; meets the Draft Recommendation document requirements; and is ready for an All Member Ballot. This is a two-step process. Step 1- The Technical Specification or other Draft Recommendation first must be made available for public review and comment for a period of at least 45 days. This review period is required to give sufficient time for Members to conduct internal legal and technical reviews of the Draft Recommendation. All comments received during the review shall be reported to both the LC and the WG that authored the Draft Recommendation. Step 2 – Upon completion of the 45-day public review period, a Simple Majority of those Voting of the LC is required to certify the Draft Recommendation ready for All Member Ballot. The LC Secretary shall then initiate the All Member Ballot. This ballot shall be conducted electronically and shall be open for a minimum of 14 days."
> There has been some confusion, I believe, around interpretation of how Public Review has been handled. Does the LC approve the Draft Recommendation to enable Public Review to go forward (which is how I seem to recall we did it for the UMA specs), or does the LC approve the Draft Recommendation only after Public Review is completed? The former seems more appropriate, given that you wouldn't want a WG-self-approved draft going out to the entire membership without the LC looking it over. But maybe we can look at past LC motions and see if I'm wrong.
> Assuming my interpretation and recollection are correct, following are the required steps and parties:
> WG: Conduct a vote to approve the submission of a technical specification as a "candidate Draft Recommendation" to the LC for approval.
> LC: Conduct a vote to certify that the candidate Draft Recommendation is within the scope of the WG charter; meets the Draft Recommendation document requirements; and is ready for Public Review [[not All Member Ballot quite yet]].
> WG and staff: Prepare specification as "Draft Recommendation" for Public Review and publish, in coordination with the LC secretary. (In the past I have worked solely with staff on this, with no particular role for the LC secretary, I must admit.)
> WG: Publish response to any comments at conclusion of Public Review period.
> LC secretary: Launch All Member Ballot. (Or should they have two votes??) (In the past ... ditto.)
> WG: (Not required but we always do this!) Launch "get out the vote" effort with Kantara membership.
> I feel like there's some more debugging that still needs to be done around the process -- the OPs have more ambiguity hidden in there...
> The UMA WG has come up with canonical wording for the Status of This Document blurb on the first page of the spec when it comes to "draft technical specification" to "candidate Draft Recommendation" to "Draft Recommendation" to "Recommendation" stage changes. I'd have to dig that up.
> Eve Maler
> Cell +1 425.345.6756 | Skype: xmlgrrl | Twitter: @xmlgrrl
> _______________________________________________
> LC mailing list
> LC at kantarainitiative.org
> http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/lc

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kantarainitiative.org/pipermail/lc/attachments/20160310/590a7a65/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 496 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://kantarainitiative.org/pipermail/lc/attachments/20160310/590a7a65/attachment.sig>

More information about the LC mailing list