My intent is to have Model WG P&P. This
is the direction SA is going.
Matthew Sherman, Ph.D.
Senior Member Technical Staff
BAE SYSTEMS, CNIR
Office: +1 973.633.6344
email: matthew.sherman@baesystems.com
From: Geoff Thompson
[mailto:gthompso@nortel.com]
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 4:07
PM
To: Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA)
Cc:
STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org; gthompso@nortel.com; bob.grow@intel.com
Subject: Re: [802SEC] Proposed
P&P Revision Ballot titled 'WG Membership & Meetings'
Mat-
If you are going to require that each WG have an appeals procedure then I think
there needs to be a statement of what constitutes the default procedure in the
absence of a WG appeals procedure.
Geoff
At 09:28 AM 3/18/2005 -0500, Sherman,
Matthew J. (US SSA) wrote:
All,
Here is the first of the four proposed rules changes for this meeting. I
have circulated
it once before. However, I have additional changes incorporated that I
view
as editorial from ML. Again, I encourage you all not to get too hung up
on the wording it will change. The key is the scope
established by agreeing to have the ballot.
Here is the current proposed ballot text:
<<802.0-WG_Membership_&_Meetings-Proposed_P&P_Revision_ballot_r3.doc>>
Here are ML s changes highlighted:
<<MJS_MLN_WG_Membership_&_Meetings-Proposed_P&P_Revision_ballot_r3.doc>>
Let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks,
Mat
Matthew Sherman, Ph.D.
Senior Member Technical Staff
BAE SYSTEMS, CNIR
Office: +1 973.633.6344
email: matthew.sherman@baesystems.com
---------- This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
This list is maintained by Listserv.
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.