Discussion List Archives

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Procedure for approving small dictionary updates

Common sense?!  These refinements seem eminently-sensible.

Jim Kaduk

Quoting James Hester <jamesrhester@gmail.com>:

> I would like to suggest some common-sense refinements to the fast-track
> procedure:
>
> (1) If all members of a DMG have responded to a proposal before the six-week
> time limit, there is no requirement to wait six weeks
> (2) If all voting members of COMCIFS have responded to a proposal before the
> six-week time limit, there is no requirement to wait six weeks
>
> I would also ask the chairs of the various DMGs to periodically (perhaps
> once a year) check on the willingness of their members to continue in the
> role, to avoid situations where ghost members hold up these types of
> processes.
>
> James.
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 12:30 PM, James Hester <jamesrhester@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Dear COMCIFS members,
>>
>> The following proposal for fast-track approval of minor dictionary
>> updates has now been approved, as a six-week discussion period has
>> expired with no unresolved comments.  Note the following changes to
>> the original proposal arising from the discussion:
>>
>> (i) the time-limit for making comments will be six weeks, rather than
>> one month as was originally suggested.
>> (ii) following the conclusion of the 6-week comment period, the Chair,
>> or designee, will explicitly state to the COMCIFS list that a proposal
>> has been approved.
>>
>> I will coordinate with Brian to update the website with information
>> about this new procedure.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> James.
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 5:48 PM, James Hester <jamesrhester@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Dear COMCIFS members,
>> >
>> > Currently the procedure for making any changes to the dictionaries
>> > requires putting those changes to a formal vote on the COMCIFS list.
>> > This may be seen as heavy-handed for small updates and additions.
>> > Following discussions with David B I would like to propose the
>> > following fast-track procedure for dealing with minor updates to the
>> > dictionaries:
>> >
>> > 1. Anybody can propose a change to the core dictionary either through
>> > the IUCr web site or by contacting the chair of the appropriate DMG.
>> >
>> > 2. In conjunction with the DMG chair, they can work out a proposal for
>> > new dictionary code.
>> >
>> > 3. This code is then submitted to the DMG for comment and eventual
>> approval.
>> >
>> > 4. The change is then posted to the COMCIFS discussion list for
>> > comment within a given time limit.
>> >
>> > 5. If no comment is received, or if all the comments are resolved, the
>> > change is accepted, otherwise it is refered back to the DMG.
>> >
>> > I suggest that a 'small change' is one that creates no new categories
>> > and affects no more than two definitions.
>> > A one month time limit for initiating comments seems about right to
>> > me, as it should allow those that happen to be on holiday to make it
>> > back in time.
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> T +61 (02) 9717 9907
>> F +61 (02) 9717 3145
>> M +61 (04) 0249 4148
>>
>
>
>
> --
> T +61 (02) 9717 9907
> F +61 (02) 9717 3145
> M +61 (04) 0249 4148
>

Reply to: [list | sender only]