[DDI-SRG] DDI Vote language

[Wendy Thomas]

Mary,

Can't remember if I got back to you on this after the TIC meeting. The 
wording is fine but we do want to make sure the page with features and use 
cases is very clear that completion of all the suggested use cases is not 
a prerequisit for passage. Those that were not completed ran into issues 
of time, financial, and organizational constraints of the people 
producing them. The point is that we examined via use cases the major 
features, located bugs and fixed them prior to producing the 3.0 package.

Wendy


On Tue, 18 Mar 2008, Mary Vardigan wrote:

> Dear TIC,
>
> Here is some proposed ballot language for the upcoming DDI 3 vote.
> Please let me know if you would like changes. Thank you.
>
> Mary
>
> ***********************************************************
>
> Members of the DDI Alliance Expert Committee:
>
> Your vote is requested to publish DDI 3.0 officially. The DDI Alliance
> Bylaws call for a vote of the members to approve changes to the
> specification. Specifically, the language states:
>
> "When Public Review has ended and the Director believes proof of concept
> (or its alternative) has been established, each Expert Committee
> Representative will be asked to give the Director a "Yes" or "No" vote.
> A "Yes" vote indicates that the validity and usefulness of the proposed
> modification have been demonstrated and that the specification should
> now be accepted as a part of the DDI standard. A "No" vote indicates the
> case has not yet been made for the proposed modification. A "No" vote
> must be accompanied with comments to explain the vote. The Director will
> consider the votes and make an informed decision as to whether to accept
> the specification or to restart the process at some earlier stage. In
> order for the specification to be approved, at least two-thirds of the
> Expert Committee must vote "Yes," but the Director is not required to
> approve the specification even if a higher proportion of the Expert
> Committee recommends its approval. The Director must explain his or her
> decision in writing to the Expert Committee. Ordinarily, the Director
> will override a substantial vote of the Expert Committee only when he or
> she perceives that the proposal would compromise the DDI as an
> international standard in the social sciences. The decision of the
> Director may be vetoed by a two-thirds vote of the Steering Committee."
>
> Public Review of DDI 3.0 took place in Spring 2007, with a vote to
> approve a Candidate Release on May 19, 2007. Three versions of the
> Candidate Release have been issued. Candidate Release 3 was issued in
> February 2008 and modified during March 2008, with the final version
> available on April 3, 2008.
>
> Proof of concept for DDI 3.0 in the form of a set of use cases and a set
> of implementations is available at:
> http://www.ddialliance.org/ddi3/use-cases.html
>
> Each of you is asked to give a "Yes" or "No" vote. Any "No" vote must be
> accompanied by comments to explain the vote. In order for the
> specification to be approved, at least two-thirds of the Expert
> Committee must vote "Yes".
>
> The voting period will take place April 21-27, with the results
> available on April 28.
>
>
> Mary Vardigan
> Assistant Director, Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social
> Research (ICPSR)
> Phone: 734-615-7908
> Fax: 734-647-8200
>
>

Wendy L. Thomas                          Phone: +1 612.624.4389
Data Access Core Director		 Fax:   +1 612.626.8375
Minnesota Population Center              Email: wlt at pop.umn.edu
University of Minnesota
50 Willey Hall
225 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55455