From: stephe@usenix.org (Stephen R. Walli)
Newsgroups: comp.std.unix
Subject: Standards Update, POSIX.0: The POSIX Guide
Date: 29 Dec 1992 14:24:02 -0800
Organization: USENIX Standards Watchdog Committee
Reply-To: std-unix@uunet.uu.net
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.uu.net
X-Submissions: std-unix@uunet.uu.net

Submitted-by: stephe@usenix.org (Stephen R. Walli)

Kevin Lewis <klewis@gucci.enet.dec.com> reports on the October 19-23,
1992 meeting in Utrecht, NL:

The ballot submission period for POSIX.0 closed on September 15,
1992.  Below are the ballot statistics:
          
          ----------------------------------------
         | 86 ballot group individuals           |
         | 81 ballot group formal members        |
         |---------------------------------------+
         | 69 ballots submitted = 85% returned   |
          ----------------------------------------
         | 11 abstentions                        |
         | 30 negative                           |
         | 28 affirmative = 48% returned         |
         | (16 affirmative w/ no comments)       |
         |---------------------------------------+
         | 1127 comments/objections (approximate)|
          ----------------------------------------

POSIX.0 dedicated all of the October meeting towards ballot
resolution.  The section leaders are serving as the technical
reviewers for ballot resolution.  They received 30 ballots via e-mail
approximately 3 weeks prior to the meeting.  (Three of the 30 were
from individuals not on the ballot list.  The group decided to treat
them as ``parties of interest.'') Fifteen were received by the ballot
coordinator on the Friday before the meeting, so the technical
reviewers saw these for the first time in Utrecht.

The group focused on identifying those objections felt to be
substantive, key, or ``show stoppers.'' The areas that these fell into
include profiles, the reference model, and public specifications.

Let me note at this point that just about everyone in the group,
including Yours Truly, demonstrated a clear case of memory shutdown,
i.e. forgetting how we dealt with process and disposition issues
during mock ballot.  I attribute that to this last quarter requiring
no working group activity aside from individuals' submitting their
ballots.  So it took the group about a day to ``re-boot.''

In parallel, the guide is also in the review and comment process
within WG15 and SC22.  As of this writing, no comments have yet been
received.

The TCOS SEC approved a resolution to forward the next draft of the
guide, which will be the first recirculation draft, to SC22 for CD
registration.

The group established the goal of completing ballot resolution within
7-10 days after the January 93 meeting.  A tentative first
recirculation meeting has been identified within the April 1993 time
frame.  This will be confirmed before the January meeting.

Overall, the guide is in good shape.  The big question, implicit as it
may be, is how well we will fare beyond the 75% requirement for
affirmative votes before the guide can be published.  It is too early
to say.  I'll have a much better feel after the January meeting.

Volume-Number: Volume 30, Number 7