(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.5779) Interesting paragraph in the WG9 SC22 report

[David Muxworthy]

On 1 Aug 2016, at 06:28, Van Snyder <van.snyder at jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:

> "Unexpected technical comment at the SC 22 level has the potential to
> delay the work of WG 9. WG 9 mitigates this risk by providing mechanisms
> for full treatment of NB technical concerns at the RG and WG level.
> Although we observe all requirements of the directives, we view SC 22
> and JTC1 level balloting as approval of documents that have already been
> completed."

Actually this "hands off, you SC22 and JTC1 lot, we know what we are
doing" statement has appeared in most WG9 annual reports since at least
2006, but was omitted in 2014.  The JTC1 Directives (Annex JA)
positively encourage discussion between National Bodies during the
ballot period but, strangely in view of other prohibition on
visibility of documents, "provided they do not use the formal
subcommittee or JTC 1 documentation distribution system"

WG9 took another pot-shot at SC22 in its 2006 report:

"The inability of SC22 to attain a quorum for its letter ballots has
now emerged as the largest single risk for the progress to the work
programme of WG9. The inability of ITTF to implement public
availability of authorized documents and withdrawal of obsolete
standards is a continuing problem."

David