Re: [sig-policy]Proposal for an APNIC document editorial policy
Agreed! >:)
Gerard Ross wrote:
> Dear colleagues
>
> The text below is a proposal to modify the current APNIC document
> review policy to create a simple editorial process that would be used
> to implement consensus decisions reached through the APNIC policy
> development process.
>
> This proposal should be read together with the Revised APNIC Policy
> Process Proposal, which was posted to this list earlier today.
>
> Comments and feedback are now sought on both proposals and should be
> made on this list.
>
> Kind regards
>
> Gerard Ross
> APNIC Documentation Manager
>
> --------------------------------------
> [addpol-prop-apnic-doc-review-v4.txt]
>
> ______________________________________________________
>
> A proposal for an APNIC document editorial policy
> ______________________________________________________
>
> Proposed by: APNIC
> Version: draft 4.0
> Date: 11 June 2003
>
> 1 Summary
> ----------------
> This document proposes modifying the current document review policy
> which is described in "APNIC Document review policies and procedures",
> available at:
>
> http://www.apnic.net/docs/policy/doc-review-policy.html
>
> It is proposed to modify the current document to take full account of
> the effect of consensus decisions reached through the APNIC policy
> development process and to provide a separate, simple editorial process.
>
> An earlier version of this proposal was discussed at APNIC 15. The
> nature of the discussions held at that meeting have been taken into
> account in preparing this current version.
>
> 2 Background and problem
> ----------------
> APNIC's policies are developed by the membership and the broader
> Internet community through a bottom-up process of consultation and
> consensus.
>
> APNIC holds two face-to-face APNIC Open Policy Meetings each year.
> Anyone may attend the meetings and participate in discussions and
> decision making. The Open Policy Meetings comprise many different
> elements, but core to the policy development process are the Special
> Interest Groups (SIGs) and the APNIC Member Meeting (AMM). At the SIG
> meetings, and throughout the year on the associated mailing lists,
> policy is created and refined through discussion and consensus-based
> decision making. Participants at the Member Meeting are asked to
> endorse the policy outcomes of the SIGs.
>
> However, the current document review policy was originally developed
> when the APNIC policy development process was less well defined,
> particularly in relation to the role of the SIGs. The current policy
> document combines the decision making process and the editorial
> process. It focuses on a process of "calls for comment" but does not
> adequately address the status of decisions which have emerged from the
> SIG process and reached consensus at the AMMs.
>
> The current document review policy also describes a set of categories
> for review, which determine the number and length of calls for
> comments. However, the role of the SIGs has evolved, and the conduct of
> SIGs and the AMM has become more structured. As a result, the system of
> categorising reviews is no longer necessary and only adds complexity to
> the process.
>
> Note: The APNIC policy development process is also under current
> review. It is intended that this proposed document editorial policy
> would complement the policy development process.
>
> 3 Other RIRs
> ----------------
> At ARIN, LACNIC, and RIPE NCC, the editorial process is contained
> within the overall policy development process (for full details, refer
> to the "Proposal for an amended APNIC open policy process").
>
> Due to the range and diversity of languages in the APNIC region, it is
> proposed to ensure consistent policy documentation by requiring the
> Secretariat to coordinate an editorial process which implements the
> decisions of the policy development process.
>
> 4 Proposal
> ----------------
> It is proposed to revise the current document, APNIC-083 "APNIC
> Document review policies and procedures" as follows:
>
> * The revised policy should include formal recognition
> of the policy development process, in which the SIGs
> and the AMM form consensus-based policies and other decisions.
>
> * The provisions relating to the categories of review should be
> removed.
>
> * The document should describe a simple editorial procedure for
> implementing the consensus decisions that arise from the policy
> development process.
>
> * Under the proposed editorial procedure, the document which
> implements a consensus decision should require only a single
> call for public review.
>
> * The existing provision which allows for requests for further
> reviews of a document should be retained, but only on the basis
> that the document does not properly reflect the consensus from
> the relevant meeting.
>
> * There should also be a provision to allow objections to the
> implementation of the document on the ground that the policy is
> fundamentally flawed and may do harm to the global Internet.
> Objections of this nature should be directed to the Executive
> Council who would have the power to suspend implementation of the
> document.
>
> * If a document is required to implement an emergency decision made
> by the Executive Council between Member Meetings, that document
> must be reviewed at the next Open Policy Meeting.
>
> 5 Implementation
> ----------------
> It is proposed to seek consensus on this proposal at APNIC 16. If
> consensus is reached, it is proposed to implement this policy as soon
> as possible, so that the editorial process may be applied to any other
> consensus items arising from that meeting.
>
> ----------------end----------------
>
> * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
> _______________________________________________
> sig-policy mailing list
> sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 131k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
Pierre Abelard
===============================================================
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix dot netcom dot com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801