Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
James – I am ok to second as well. However, I wonder if we are reading too much of the administrative process into the motion, though with the second sentence (Technical Editors who want access to these licenses will contact the IEEE 802
LMSC First Vice Chair, who will determine the distribution of the licenses.”) Would it not be sufficient to simply say: “The IEEE 802 LMSC authorizes the purchase of Framemaker subscription
Or even to leave off the whole ‘to be administered’ clause? That way, if, for example, you want a WG to do traffic control on your requests, and delegate some control – you can. Just a thought, but in general we are authorizing the expenditure here – not really specifying the allocation process. I’m OK either way, but prefer less process in the motion. -george From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List ***** <STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org>
On Behalf Of Jon Rosdahl James, I am ok to provide a Second. Jon ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Rosdahl Engineer, Senior Staff
On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 6:38 PM James P. K. Gilb <000008e8b69871c2-dmarc-request@ieee.org> wrote:
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-SEC list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-SEC&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-SEC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-SEC&A=1 |