>> I think the plan was to send the authors our comments after we agree >> on wording for the modifications of the code that stemmed from the >> CBM proposal (see the last paragraph in Dave Tank's Aug. 25 message). >> I hope we can move this along quickly now. Dave's deadline for >> responding with general categories of changes was Sept. 3. I suggest >> that we can finish with this matter most quickly by proceeding as >> follows: >> 1) Give committee members one week to speak up if any of us disagrees >> that a certain change or kind of change (not the specific wording) >> would be worthwhile. >> 2) For those changes where there is no disagreement, I am willing to >> take the lead in framing specific wording in consultation with Kevin. >> Then we will submit our suggested wording to the CPN for discussion, >> possible modification, and a vote. These should probably be >> discussed and voted on one by one, as Kevin Padian suggested, but >> let's try to limit ourselves to no more than a week for each, >> preferably less, as I don't think most of them will be controversial. >> 3) For the suggested categories of change where there is disagreement >> within the CPN, why don't we give ourselves a few days to express our >> views and then vote on whether to turn them over to me and Kevin to >> draft wording or leave them as currently worded in the code. This >> can be done simultaneously with step 2 since step 2 does not involve >> the whole CPN. That's all fine. >> If anyone has an alternative idea of how to proceed, please say so >> soon; let's keep things moving along. >> >> I am aware of the following kinds of changes that have been proposed: >> 1) Broadening the definition of species in the glossary and elsewhere >> in the code. >> 2) Simplify and improve Art. 21, as proposed by David M. and others. >> 3) Modify the Preamble along the lines suggested by CBM. >> 4) Delete Note 3.1.1 and consider merging Note 3.1.2 with Art. 3.1 >> 5) Reword Art. 9.7 (see my Aug. 27 message for details) >> 6) Reword Rec. 9c (see my Aug. 27 message for details) >> 7) Delete Rec. 11.4B >> >> Did I miss any? I don't think you have. >> The only one of these for which disagreement has been expressed to >> date is number 7, which David M. disagrees with. How about items 1 >> through 6? Does anyone disagree that it is worthwhile for Kevin and >> me to draw up specific wording on these for the CPN to consider? I >> suggest that we set ourselves a deadline of Sunday, Sept. 16 for CPN >> members who disagree with any of these changes to say so. Is this >> procedure OK with everyone? It would be good to hear from at least >> Dave, as CPN chair, but I hope everyone will feel free to suggest an >> alternative way to proceed if you are uncomfortable with my suggestions. I'm fine with this, and with items 1 through 6.
(740) 593–9381 | Building 21, The Ridges
Ohio University | Athens OH 45701 | 740.593.1000 ADA Compliance | © 2018 Ohio University . All rights reserved.