From <@mail.uunet.ca:stephe@speaker>  Wed Jan 31 05:12:40 1996
Received: from seraph.uunet.ca (uunet.ca [142.77.1.254]) by dkuug.dk (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id FAA02123 for <sc22wg15@dkuug.dk>; Wed, 31 Jan 1996 05:12:37 +0100
Received: from speaker by mail.uunet.ca with UUCP id <255494-8>; Tue, 30 Jan 1996 23:15:59 -0500
Received: by speaker (MKS UUCP); Tue, 30 Jan 96 21:40:19 EST
To: sc22wg15@dkuug.dk
Subject: Electronic Source to Docs
Message-Id: <823038019@speaker>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 1996 21:40:19 -0500
From: stephe@srw.com (Stephen Walli)

Gentlemen,

I write the following as the Vice Chair of Tech Editting for PASC, 
and as a voting member of the PASC/SEC and the project management subcommittee.
This is not a U.S. WG15 TAG position.  It is not the IEEE's position.

I believe some of the confusion of releasing electronic source of IEEE
documents to Denmark comes from the fact that no one within the IEEE Standards
Office or PASC views Denmark as a tech editor of an IEEE document yet.
(As Vice Chair of Technical Editting for PASC I don't recognise that they
have committed to any work yet.)

My understanding from talking to Keld at the October PASC meeting, 
in his capacity as HoD for Denmark to WG15, is that 
Keld has offered in good faith to give us an estimate of the work to complete
the LIS of 9945-1:1990 and *possibly* its current amendments and determine 
whether or not there are resources/interests in Denmark to complete some of 
this work -- he has not yet committed to the work itself.

I will investigate with the IEEE tomorrow (Weds) about the possibilities 
of obtaining source for the documents to which I pointed in the action item
response.  Recognise that these are documents for which (i) standards exist,
so the IEEE Standards Office is likely to be very copyright-oriented and
control paranoid, (ii) Denmark will never be tech editor.  (John Zolnowsky 
has already performed a stellar job in this area.)

I will further investigate and confirm that current electronic source for
the *existing* 9945-1:1990 LIS work has been delivered to Keld.  (It was my
understanding that this *has* happened.)  I will determine whether or not
Paul Rabin has forwarded the annotated copy of the draft from the last ballot
circulation to Keld.   

However, at this point, if all of these things are done, 
as a member of the PASC/SEC and its projects subcommittee, and as Vice Chair of 
Tech Editting, I would like to hear from Denmark as to what it intends to do
with respect to getting the *existing* document through ballot (for which there
is already an IEEE PAR and an ISO work item,) before I hear about estimates
for possible future amendments or amending the PAR and or WI.
That is a number that can be delivered in the near term based on the above
two points data points being sent to Denmark, and does not require electronic 
source to amendments.

If I am wrong in any of my assumptions or logic here, please feel free to
correct me. 

best regards,
stephe