[CRISP-TEAM] Timeline, and incorporating Bill's edits submission

[Alan Barrett]

On Wed, 14 Jan 2015, Izumi Okutani wrote:
> I would like to have your feedback on a draft timeline of our 
> work before we submit the final proposal to the ICG.

How will we incorporate Bill's copy-editing work?  My proposal 
follows.

I would hope that we can agree on all substantive changes during 
the call today, and then perhaps Michael can produce a document 
that includes all those changes, and share it with all of us.

Next, I hope that Bill can update his copy-edited document to 
include all the recent changes made to Michael's document, and 
share that with us.

Finally, I hope that we can review Bill's document and approve the 
final version at tomorrow's meeting.

Let me try to explain that again, with the aid of this diagram 
(please view in a fixed-width font):

]  A: Second draft, published on 9 Jan 2015
]          :
]          :
]  B: CRISP IANA PROPOSAL Draft 12012015-mraredline.docx
]     prepared by Michael, with changes from several people
]          :                                  :
]          :                                  :
]          :               C: CRISP Team Proposal-BW3.doc
]          :                  with Bill's copy-editing changes
]          :                                  :
]  D: current work in progress,               :
]     being collected by Michael              :
]          :                                  :
]          :                                  :
]  E: New draft to be produced by Michael     :
]     soon after the call on Wed 14 Jan 2015  :
]          :                                  :
]          :                ..................
]          :               :
]  F: New draft to be produced (by who?)
]     incorporating both the agreed changes from B->D->E
]     and the copy-editing changes from B->C
]          :
]          :
]  G: Final version to be sent to ICG

Between Monday's call and Tuesday's call, Alan Barrett, Michael 
Abejuela, and Bill Wodcock, worked on incorporating suggestions 
from several people, and copy-editing.  Bill did most of the 
copy-editing.  The results were two documents, labeled "B" and 
"C" above.  "B" includes edits performed by Alan Barrett and 
Michael Abejuela, incoprorating suggestions from several sources.  
Document "C" was based on "B", and includes edits by Bill 
Woodcock.

Most of the changes from "B" to "C" were Bill's copy-editing.  
Some changes might have been in response to suggestions from others 
(I am not sure).

During yesterday's call, people were uncomfortable adopting the 
document produced by Bill (labeled "C" above), so I suggested 
going back to the document labeled "B" above, which incorporates 
editorial changes from many people, and substantive changes from 
Paul Wilson.

Over the past 20 hours or so, we have been discussing changes 
relative to document "B", so we are at the point labeled "D" in my 
diagram.

I hope that we can produce document "E" soon after the call today 
(Wednesday 14 Jan).

I do not want to lose the changes that Bill made between "B" and 
"C", so I think we should produce a new document "F" that includes 
all the changes from B to D to E (being collected by Michael, and 
to be approved at or soon after today's call), and all the changes 
from B to C (copy-editing by Bill), plus whatever small changes 
are necessary to resolve conflicts between the two lines of edits.

I hope that we can approve document "F" during tomorrow's call 
(Thu 15 Jan), and make minimal changes after tomorrow's call 
before sending the final version "G" to the ICG.

--apb (Alan Barrett)