RE: [vhdl-200x] Call for Vote on WG Policies & Procedures

Hi John,

I'm glad to see that people are alive and awake on the list! (I know DAC was busy for me, but I was concerned that there was no discussion of either the P&Ps or the draft PAR.) Replies embedded below.

-Steve Bailey

> My concern now is to understand the impact of a WG that has
> mixed membership, individual and corporate, and understand
> how it will operate. Am I correct that the WG will be so
> composed? If so, the discussion of voting eligibility, proxy
> for a corporate vote, etc.
> that took place at the DAC 200x meeting should be verified
> and clarified, if necessary, in the P&P we adopt.

First, it is yet to be decided if we will have mixed individual and organizational entity membership as we haven't yet started a vote to approve the draft PAR.

If we do have mixed membership, the model WG P&Ps allow for that via reference to the IEEE CS SAB P&Ps. The model WG P&Ps only add a requirement of DASC membership as well as explicitly allowing meetings via telecon and email. The IEEE CS SAB P&Ps section 4.7.1 (http://www.computer.org/standards/ORIENT/p%26ptoc.htm) define voting membership for organization entities analogous to individual members. For organizational entities, the participation requirements are the same and are defined in terms of the organization's principal or alternate representatives. An organization that does not actively participate, loses their voting rights.

Proxies are not permitted. (See 4.10 of CS SAB P&Ps.) Organizations have designated (upon joining the WG) primary and alternate representatives.

While I think the question of relationship between the two issues had to be raised, hopefully I have pointed out that the model WG P&Ps handles the situation in a fair and complete manner based on parent organization P&Ps that were defined to handle all membership situations. Therefore, I believe discussion and approval of WG P&Ps can be conducted independent of WG membership as specified in the PAR to be voted on shortly.

-Steve Bailey

> Regards, John
>
>
> On Thu, 2004-06-17 at 11:44, Bailey, Stephen wrote:
> > I had previously pointed to the DASC model WG policies and
> procedures and opened discussion on their suitability for
> adoption as the 1076 (VHDL-200x) working group's P&Ps. To
> date, there has been no discussion on this topic. Therefore,
> I will presume a motion to adopt the DASC model WG P&Ps.
> >
> > Please note that, according to the P&Ps, voting membership requires
> > participation and, working on the assumption that this vote
> will pass,
> > I will begin documenting participation with this vote.
> (See section
> > 4.7.1 of the CS SAB P&Ps
> > http://www.computer.org/standards/ORIENT/p%26ptoc.htm
> > <http://www.computer.org/standards/ORIENT/p%26ptoc.htm> as
> referenced
> > in section 4.1 of the model WG P&Ps.)
> >
> > The WG Roster at
> http://www.eda-twiki.org/vhdl-200x/1076_wg_roster_summary.htm
> <http://www.eda-twiki.org/vhdl-200x/1076_wg_roster_summary.htm> is
> accurate with one exception (John Aynsley is now a voting
> member) which should be fixed on the web page later today.
> >
> > Suspense date for submitting a vote is Friday, 2 July 2004.
> The motion being put to a vote of the WG:
> >
> > Shall the P1076 (VHDL-200x) working group adopt the DASC
> model WG Policies and Procedures as the P&Ps of the working group?
> >
> > ____ Approve (comments are optional)
> >
> > ____ Disapprove (explanation, please)
> >
> > ____ Abstain
> >
> > ------------
> > Stephen Bailey
> > ModelSim Verification TME
> > Mentor Graphics
> > sbailey@model.com
> > 303-775-1655 (mobile, preferred)
> > 720-494-1202 (office)
> > www.model.com <www.model.com>
>
Received on Thu Jun 17 15:16:52 2004