Subject: DASC P&P Comments
From: Jim Lewis (Jim@synthworks.com)
Date: Sun Nov 23 2003 - 15:23:02 PST
Please don't confuse this with my last post.
The last one was for working groups. This one is
for DASC P&P. Note there are some similarities since
the documents are related.
DASC P&P Comments
-------------------------
IMO, too much is included by reference in the working
group procedures. The introduction asserts some statements
that any interested party has the right to (a), (b), and (c),
but the document fails to define exactly who can participate
and how one can accomplish the above tasks (a, b, c).
Rather than leave this a general complaint, I have made
several proposals below, some with details some without.
It would be nice if all DASC working groups had identical
or nearly identical operating procedures.
-------------------------
Section 3 does not define the term of the officers.
If it is 2 years, I propose we add the new subsection
as follows:
3.1: Term
The term of an officer in the working group is 2 years.
-------------------------
Section 3.1
4th paragraph states:
"Election of the Chair and Vice-Chair shall be
confirmed by the DASC."
I prefer this interpretation, but according to
DASC and DASC-SC procedures, this appears to be
a DASC-SC responsibility.
-------------------------
Section 3.1 and 7.3, 13.2
How many days is reasonable for responses:
Sections 3.1 and 7.2 say 14 and sectio n13.2 says 5.
What does 14 days mean?
So if we make it 14 consecutive days and call the
vote on August 2nd, then we can exclude many European
people from voting.
During the summer, some people go on vacation for a period
that exceeds 14 consecutive days. Since individual members
do not have a delegate, do people expect
-------------------------
Section 4.
Need to fully define that anyone can participate
and to what extent they are permitted to participate.
Already have some in 4.3, but it is not clear what a
non-voting member can do.
I propose that we insert a new section prior to 4.1 Voting Membership
4.1 Participating
Anyone may attend an IEEE standards meeting.
Anyone may join an IEEE standards working group reflector and
comment on issues that are being discussed on the reflector.
Anyone may submit a proposal for change to the working group.
A non-voting member of the working group may common on a balloted
issue provided that they clearly mark their ballot as non-voting.
As part of this proposal, I note that accepting this proposal
would make it recommended to remove the terms from the current
4.2 which states:
"Please note that all IEEE Standards meetings are open to anyone
who wishes to attend."
-------------------------
Current 4.1 Voting Membership
I think many interested users cannot attend in person or
phone meetings due job restrictions. These people could
contribute if we add the facility to do this.
From IEEE-CS SAB 4.7.1.1 Individual Expert:
"Membership also may be granted on the basis of written
participation, provided that the CSSC P&P specifies
the detailed circumstances of such grant."
I propose that we change section 4.1 to:
To be a voting member, a Working Group member shall be a member of
DASC and participate in the Working Group activities as specified in
Clause 4.7 of the IEEE-CS SAB. Note that clause IEEE-CS SAB
clause 4.7 requires a voting member to participate in 2 of 3
consecutive meetings to retain voting membership.
For this Working Group, a meeting shall deemed to be an in person
meeting, a teleconference, or a Working Group ballot conducted by
letter or email.
A person shall be deemed to have attended a meeting if either
they or their delegate attend the meeting or if they submit
written comments prior to or following the meeting regarding the
meetings topics and submit an "absentee ballot" for all issues
balloted during the meeting.
-------------------------
4.1 Voting Membership
For people who do not pay the cost of membership of DASC or
IEEE, can a chair invite a non-DASC/non-IEEE member to be a
voting member of a working group based on active participation
(sweat equity) in the working group. Note it is intended that
active participation be actively submitting proposals and
writing resolutions and not just attending meetings and voting.
Note this may be a DASC term and not a working group term.
-------------------------
For people new to participating, it is not clear that to
ballot a standard that they must be a IEEE-SA member.
I propose that we add a new section following the current 4.1 Voting
Membership:
4.x Balloting a Working Group Standard
The rules of IEEE-SA XXXX govern voting requirements for
when a standard is to be balloted. [need help with wording here]
Note that currently the only requirements are that a person
be an IEEE-SA member.
-------------------------
Current 4.2 Application
Are detailed application forms needed since all of our
information should be recorded in our DASC membership
profile? Do we need anything more than name and
email?
If we are going to submit application forms to each
group we join, it would be nice if all the forms
were identical so that we could just change the group
name and submit our information.
Note for the only group I have joined that has
formalized the collection of an application, I got
confused as to why I did not also get placed on the
groups email reflector when I signed up for the group.
It is very important that the webpage clearly identify
both the application form and the method for signing
up on the working groups reflector.
-------------------------
Current 4.2 Application
Can a chair reject an application from an IEEE member?
-------------------------
4.4 Interest Catagories
We have discussed the issues on the reflector.
I think if we require all votes to be recorded on
a publically accessable reflector some of the voting
irregularities will go away.
If someone tries to block a proposal for political
reasons, then it can be addressed by the media.
-------------------------
Section 5.3 Working Groups
Add the following:
Working group shall coordinate with DASC to get a link
to the working group website posted to www.eda.org.
Policies and procedures shall be posted on the working
groups website.
Method for joing the email list/reflector shall be posted
on the working group website.
Method for making a proposal to the group shall be
documented in the working groups policies and procedures.
Method for initiating a call for vote shall be documented
in the working groups policies and procedures.
-------------------------
Need section before 6 on
procedures for making proposals to a DASC.
Define format for a change proposal
Sponsoring a resolution to a change proposal.
Need legal verbage that makes all proposals and
submissions to IEEE working groups the property
of IEEE so we don't have any copyright problems.
Furthermore, need to note that any work done for
an employeer needs to be accomponied by a donation
letter. See XXXX for a sample donation letter.
-------------------------
Need terms for assigning stuff to IEEE:
Any information, code or documents posted to
a working group reflector shall become property
of IEEE and are permitted to be used in IEEE
standards anyway.
-------------------------
6 Meetings
Need terms for submitting a opinion for issues being discussed
in a meeting for purposes of being counted as attendance.
-------------------------
7 Voting
Need terms for calling for a vote
Only the chair? Other members?
If the chair is "too busy" can the working group carry on business
while they are "away"?
To facilitate recording ballots, I propose that we do all
balloting via email.
Procedures for balloting
All balloted decisions need to have provisions for
to accept "absentee ballots" via email from people who are not
able to attend a meeting.
At meetings it may be appropriate to take a test vote to
make sure that people in the meeting are in concurrance
with what is going to be submitted to the reflector for
vote.
-------------------------
Section 8
Add section on technical communication via email:
Section 8.3 Technical Communication
All technical communication done via email shall be done
via the groups email reflector. Working group members
should encourage non-members to join the reflector to
ask questions and should respond to any questions received
email by cc'ing the reflector.
Note that eda.org reflectors support a post-as-well
list that members can use if they feel the need to
post to the email reflector with a "SPAM-PROOF"
email address.
-------------------------
Sections 13 and 14.
What is a standards position statement?
How does a standards position statement differ from standards
publicity?
Best Regards,
Jim Lewis
-- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Jim Lewis Director of Training mailto:Jim@SynthWorks.com SynthWorks Design Inc. http://www.SynthWorks.com 1-503-590-4787Expert VHDL Training for Hardware Design and Verification ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sun Nov 23 2003 - 15:25:42 PST