SUO: RE: Impact of SUMO vote
I could have answered my own question by re-reading the ballot. I asked:
--------------------------------
I would like a clarification from anyone as to what the actual impact of the recent close vote to work on the SUMO will mean, assuming for the moment that the vote stands.
There was talk at one time of the SUMO being taken over by an officially appointed editor, and that all changes would be put to votes after that time. Are we at that milestone now, or if not, what has actually changed as a result of this vote? What new process are we under now?
--------------------------------
The last section of the ballot says:
c. If this vote passes, this document will change from being the work (and
under the control) of a group of individuals to being the work (and under
the control) of the SUO WG. A Technical Editor will be appointed or
elected, who will incorporate WG-approved changes into the document. This
does not require frequent formal votes for every change. A better approach
for daily or weekly updates is to develop consensus by resolving objections,
as we did when revising the Scope and Purpose. In other words, (1) the
Technical Editor leads the discussion by processing the issues and
suggestions; (2) the issues/suggestions identify proposed additions,
changes, or deletions to the wording in the document; (3) the Technical
Editor asks the WG for any objections. Items that do not have clear
consensus would be accumulated for later, more formal processing, i.e., the
proposer of the issue/suggestion is responsible for making a formal proposal
(with a WG vote) for the proposed change.
So I assume the next step (if the vote stands) will be to appoint an official editor. Would this be someone other than Ian Niles, or would he continue with his work?
I noted in the ballot that with a one-vote margin, Jim Schoening could choose to create a tie vote:
The Chair may vote to make or break a tie.
John Thompson
Boeing