Re: [dow3tf] Registrar amendments to IPC draft
- To: <ross@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [dow3tf] Registrar amendments to IPC draft
- From: "Brian Darville" <BDARVILLE@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:55:55 -0400
- Cc: <registrars@xxxxxxxx>, <dow3tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Sender: owner-dow3tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
You should not assume acceptance from silence. The IPC views the changes as greatly diminishing any meaningful progress on data accuracy so I don't think many members of the IPC view your proposed changes as progress. We can discuss this further on the call tomorrow.
>>> "Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@xxxxxxxxxx> 10/19/04 03:41PM >>>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 14/10/2004 12:14 PM Ross Wm. Rader noted that;
| Pursuant to our teleconference yesterday, I have created a revised draft
| ~ of the IPC recommendations that I would be comfortable presenting to
| the membership of the Registrar constituency.
I've not seen any comments on this proposal from the members of the task
force. Normally, I would assume that this means that they are
non-controversial, but I'm not sure this is the case. Does anyone have
any input regarding this draft?
I have received some comments from members of the registrar constituency
that we can review in at the same time that we have a larger discussion
as a group.
~ "Every contrivance of man, every tool, every instrument,
~ every utensil, every article designed for use, of each
~ and every kind, evolved from very simple beginnings."
~ - Robert Collier
Got Blog? http://www.blogware.com
My Blogware: http://www.byte.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3-nr1 (Windows XP)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----