[CRISP-TEAM] Announcement for the edited version_ ver.2

[Izumi Okutani]

Thank you Alan for the suggestion.

> There are also other changes unrelated to ordering, such as in the
> treatment of acronyms, and there are minor additions to correct issues
> that were noticed during the re-ordering process.  To encompass all

That's true. I agree.

> this, I suggest the following text:
>
>     Most of the editorial changes are intended to clarify our answers
>     to the RFP, by re-ordering answers in the same order as questions
>     listed in each Section.  Some small additions have been made to
>     address points that had not been answered in the earlier draft.
>     Finally, there are some changes made for stylistic reasons.

This gives an accurate description covering all changes. Thanks Alan.

I felt the intention of the editorial changes ("to clarify our answers
to RFP") is still valid and may be worth mentioning, so I added the
second sentence in your suggested text, starting from "Some small" and
kept the original sentence from my draft for the first sentence for now.

What do you think?

If you feel this doesn't capture your point well, I'm also OK to replace
the whole part as you suggested. Let me know whether you feel
comfortable with the version below.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Editorial version of Internet Number Community IANA Stewardship
Proposal published
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Colleagues,


CRISP Team has published an editorial version of the Internet
numbers community's response to the Request For Proposals issued by the
IANA Stewardship Coordination Group (ICG):

  ## URL ##

>From the initial draft we published on 19th Dec [*], we have made
editorial changes only. No changes are made in contents of the proposal.

[*]
https://www.nro.net/wp-content/uploads/CRISP-IANA-PROPOSAL-First-Draft1.pdf

The editorial changes are intended to clarify our answers to RFP, by
re-ordering answers in the same order as questions listed in each
Section. Some small additions have been made to address points that had
not been answered in the earlier draft. Finally, there are some changes
made for stylistic reasons.

The deadline of the comments to be submitted to <ianaxfer at nro.net>
mailing list remains the same: Monday 5th Jan 2015.

Please let us know if you have any questions about version 1.1 of our
draft proposal, and we continue to welcome feedback from the community.


Best Regards,
Consolidated RIR IANA Stewardship Proposal Team (CRISP Team)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


Thanks,
Izumi


(2014/12/25 17:10), Alan Barrett wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Dec 2014, Izumi Okutani wrote:
>> This is a draft announcement once the edited version 1.1 is posted on
>> NRO website.
> 
> Thank you.  I have just one comment:
> 
>> The editorial changes are intended to clarify our answers to RFP, by
>> re-ordering answers in the same order as questions listed in each 
>> Section.
> 
> There are also other changes unrelated to ordering, such as in the 
> treatment of acronyms, and there are minor additions to correct issues 
> that were noticed during the re-ordering process.  To encompass all 
> this, I suggest the following text:
> 
>     Most of the editorial changes are intended to clarify our answers
>     to the RFP, by re-ordering answers in the same order as questions
>     listed in each Section.  Some small additions have been made to
>     address points that had not been answered in the earlier draft.
>     Finally, there are some changes made for stylistic reasons.
> 
> --apb (Alan Barrett)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CRISP mailing list
> CRISP at nro.net
> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/crisp