Subject: Re: (SC35WG1.507) (SC35WG2.17) JTC1/SC35 meeting - Barcelona, week of 10 February 2014

From: ALB <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 09:57:34 -0500

Le 2014-01-28 à 08:32, Khalid CHOUKRI a écrit :
>Well I am surprised to see that (and hope this is only WG1!) , let 
>us discuss it again and see how to move forward.

[Alain]  So far I have seen unanimity of those who expressed their 
views from other WGs as well (Seki San, Jim, Monique, Karl, Keld, 
etc.). Nobody else said the view I expressed on GOM was not the best 
and most efficient one, and the one understood in Saskatoon too at 
our infornal meeting. That is why I say it is certainly only a 
misunderstanding between those who knew GOMs and you, Khalid (no 
offence intended, of course, I'm just in search of the best). Btw GOM 
is a concept invented by AFNOR at the time (for meetings when the 
secretary could not be present). It pleased everybody. It seems it 
still pleases.

    Some other remarks:

1) not all P-members are represented at Plenaries with a capital P, 
unfortunately. There is no reason to be more severe concerning this 
at resolution plenaries with a small p. In general, except for one or 
2 exceptions, member bodies really participating in making projects 
attend all meetings (that said without diminishing the importance of 
others who still show their solidarity in the voting process of 
documents to be published, which is very important and the name of 
the game in international standards).

2) The notion of quorum is important (both at Plenaries and 
"plenaries" [GOMs]). Resolutions taken by GOMs should be as executory 
as those taken at Plenaries because there is a quorum (without letter 
ballot to approve those resolutions again). Whether these resolutions 
are approved in a GOM or in a single WG should not matter. In other 
SCs, even when there is an interim meeting (no Plenary), resolutions 
of WGs are executory immediately ans are not approved twice in a 
further letter ballot (case in point : JTC1/SC2, in which I am active 
both as convernor and editor).

3) GOMs just assures SC35 coherence, as there are multiple projects 
that inter-relates WGs (which may be not the case in other SCs). It 
is essential to have constant coherence, all year round. This GOM 
process does not violate any ISO or IEC rule to my nowledge (on the 
contrary, it improves efficience), it is an internal process (checked 
by AFNOR at the time). It also ensures there is no dispersion, and 
should be an asset more to ensure that nothing is forgotten, Dividing 
SC35 further would not be a good idea, it would be detrimental to 
coherence, I'm convinced about this.

Alain 

---
Ce courrier électronique ne contient aucun virus ou logiciel malveillant parce que la protection avast! Antivirus est active.
http://www.avast.com