From needleman_mark at yahoo.com Fri Mar 4 21:41:50 2016 From: needleman_mark at yahoo.com (Mark Needleman) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 21:41:50 -0500 Subject: [Asis-standards] ISO vote Message-ID: <08E9E24B-B85D-4C35-BB77-8C6FA16605EC@yahoo.com> Having received no comments i just cast the following vote CONFIRM on Systematic Review of ISO 16175-2:2011 Information and documentation -- Principles and functional requirements for records in electronic office environments -- Part 2: Guidelines and functional requirements for digital records management systems Mark -------------- next part -------------- Having received no comments i just cast the following vote CONFIRM on Systematic Review of ISO 16175-2:2011 Information and documentation -- Principles and functional requirements for records in electronic office environments -- Part 2: Guidelines and functional requirements for digital records management systems Mark From needleman_mark at yahoo.com Mon Mar 7 11:48:12 2016 From: needleman_mark at yahoo.com (Mark Needleman) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 11:48:12 -0500 Subject: [Asis-standards] ISO vote Message-ID: <691094B2-47D5-4BBB-BAF6-238E6EC81425@yahoo.com> Folks hearing no objections i just cast the following vote: Voted CONFIRM on 5 Year Systematic Review of Systematic Review of ISO 16175-3:2010 Information and documentation -- Principles and functional requirements for records in electronic office environments -- Part 3: Guidelines and functional requirements for records in business systems mark -------------- next part -------------- Folks hearing no objections i just cast the following vote: Voted CONFIRM on 5 Year Systematic Review of Systematic Review of ISO 16175-3:2010 Information and documentation -- Principles and functional requirements for records in electronic office environments -- Part 3: Guidelines and functional requirements for records in business systems mark From needleman_mark at yahoo.com Tue Mar 8 14:27:58 2016 From: needleman_mark at yahoo.com (Mark Needleman) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 14:27:58 -0500 Subject: [Asis-standards] ISO vote Message-ID: Folks having received no comments i just cast the following vote: Voted CONFIRM on 5 Year Systematic Review of ISO 17933:2000 Information and documentation - GEDI ? Generic Electronic Document Interchange Mark -------------- next part -------------- Folks having received no comments i just cast the following vote: Voted CONFIRM on 5 Year Systematic Review of ISO 17933:2000 Information and documentation - GEDI ? Generic Electronic Document Interchange Mark From needleman_mark at yahoo.com Mon Mar 14 15:57:56 2016 From: needleman_mark at yahoo.com (Mark Needleman) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 15:57:56 -0400 Subject: [Asis-standards] Comments on ISO ISSN revision Message-ID: <5BDE016B-C420-424D-A22E-1B4B7E130261@yahoo.com> Folks I just submitted the following comments on the ISO ISSN revision ISO 3297-2007-ISSN Revision ASIST agrees with other commenters that this both a confusing vote and not a minor revision to the standard. It's unclear what providing no comments implies. If it implies agreement with the removal of the text that says assignment of ISSNs is free that is a significant change to the standard even if there is no plan to charge for assignments at this time. It leaves open the possibility of charging in the future and thus we feel that requires a substantive vote for approval or not and not merely an opportunity to provide comments especially since it's unclear exactly what effect any comments would have on the future of the ISSN standard -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No vote was requested so we only provided comments (Comments provided by Timothy Dickey, Marjorie Hlava and Mark Needleman) -------------- next part -------------- Folks I just submitted the following comments on the ISO ISSN revision ISO 3297-2007-ISSN Revision ASIST agrees with other commenters that this both a confusing vote and not a minor revision to the standard. It's unclear what providing no comments implies. If it implies agreement with the removal of the text that says assignment of ISSNs is free that is a significant change to the standard even if there is no plan to charge for assignments at this time. It leaves open the possibility of charging in the future and thus we feel that requires a substantive vote for approval or not and not merely an opportunity to provide comments especially since it's unclear exactly what effect any comments would have on the future of the ISSN standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------ No vote was requested so we only provided comments (Comments provided by Timothy Dickey, Marjorie Hlava and Mark Needleman) From mhlava at accessinn.com Wed Mar 16 12:34:28 2016 From: mhlava at accessinn.com (Marjorie Hlava) Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 10:34:28 -0600 Subject: [Asis-standards] ISO 3297-2007-ISSN Revision Message-ID: still looks like a NO vote is the right one to do- I still believe this will cause the ?standard? to be implemented differently in different countries and therefore no longer be a standard Marjorie Hlava mhlava at accessinn.com > On Mar 10, 2016, at 12:00 PM, Gregory Grazevich wrote: > > FYI, Margie's comment on the initial ballot was: > > I have voted Yes - but it is really a NO Vote. My comments as follows > > This is a confusing vote. Are we voting against the change or voting to put the ballot forward? Or does the vote not matter and this is just a vehicle to collect comments? > > I don't think it a minor revision but a change in direction for the ISSN, perhaps implemented by country maintenance agency creating a patchwork of compliance and a danger to the long time worth of the standard. > > ____________________________________________________________________________ >> >> Modifier's message >> This ballot was stated incorrectly based on the information given. If you agree with the amendment then vote "yes" If you DO NOT agree with the amendment then vote "no" with your comment. Should you need assistance in changing your vote please don't hesitate to contact me at dparks at niso.org >> -- DeVonne Parks >> DeVonne Parks modified the ballot ISO 3297-2007-ISSN Revision Marjorie Hlava mhlava at accessinn.com -------------- next part -------------- still looks like a NO vote is the right one to do- I still believe this will cause the ?standard? to be implemented differently in different countries and therefore no longer be a standard Marjorie Hlava [1]mhlava at accessinn.com On Mar 10, 2016, at 12:00 PM, Gregory Grazevich <[2]ggrazevich at mla.org> wrote: FYI, Margie's comment on the initial ballot was: I have voted Yes - but it is really a NO Vote. My comments as follows This is a confusing vote. Are we voting against the change or voting to put the ballot forward? Or does the vote not matter and this is just a vehicle to collect comments? I don't think it a minor revision but a change in direction for the ISSN, perhaps implemented by country maintenance agency creating a patchwork of compliance and a danger to the long time worth of the standard. ____________________________________________________________________________ Modifier's message This ballot was stated incorrectly based on the information given. If you agree with the amendment then vote "yes" If you DO NOT agree with the amendment then vote "no" with your comment. Should you need assistance in changing your vote please don't hesitate to contact me at [3]dparks at niso.org -- DeVonne Parks DeVonne Parks modified the ballot ISO 3297-2007-ISSN Revision Marjorie Hlava [4]mhlava at accessinn.com References 1. mailto:mhlava at accessinn.com 2. mailto:ggrazevich at mla.org 3. mailto:dparks at niso.org 4. mailto:mhlava at accessinn.com From needleman_mark at yahoo.com Wed Mar 16 12:41:04 2016 From: needleman_mark at yahoo.com (Mark Needleman) Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 12:41:04 -0400 Subject: [Asis-standards] ISO 3297-2007-ISSN Revision In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1A807E71-D409-45E5-98E8-7C10E268B264@yahoo.com> Marjorie except they didn?t ask for a vote - only comments mark > On Mar 16, 2016, at 12:34 PM, Marjorie Hlava wrote: > > still looks like a NO vote is the right one to do- I still believe this will cause the ?standard? to be implemented differently in different countries and therefore no longer be a standard > > > Marjorie Hlava > mhlava at accessinn.com > > > > >> On Mar 10, 2016, at 12:00 PM, Gregory Grazevich > wrote: >> >> FYI, Margie's comment on the initial ballot was: >> >> I have voted Yes - but it is really a NO Vote. My comments as follows >> >> This is a confusing vote. Are we voting against the change or voting to put the ballot forward? Or does the vote not matter and this is just a vehicle to collect comments? >> >> I don't think it a minor revision but a change in direction for the ISSN, perhaps implemented by country maintenance agency creating a patchwork of compliance and a danger to the long time worth of the standard. >> >> ____________________________________________________________________________ >>> >>> Modifier's message >>> This ballot was stated incorrectly based on the information given. If you agree with the amendment then vote "yes" If you DO NOT agree with the amendment then vote "no" with your comment. Should you need assistance in changing your vote please don't hesitate to contact me at dparks at niso.org >>> -- DeVonne Parks >>> DeVonne Parks modified the ballot ISO 3297-2007-ISSN Revision > > Marjorie Hlava > mhlava at accessinn.com > > > > -------------- next part -------------- Marjorie except they didn?t ask for a vote - only comments mark On Mar 16, 2016, at 12:34 PM, Marjorie Hlava <[1]mhlava at accessinn.com> wrote: still looks like a NO vote is the right one to do- I still believe this will cause the ?standard? to be implemented differently in different countries and therefore no longer be a standard Marjorie Hlava [2]mhlava at accessinn.com On Mar 10, 2016, at 12:00 PM, Gregory Grazevich <[3]ggrazevich at mla.org> wrote: FYI, Margie's comment on the initial ballot was: I have voted Yes - but it is really a NO Vote. My comments as follows This is a confusing vote. Are we voting against the change or voting to put the ballot forward? Or does the vote not matter and this is just a vehicle to collect comments? I don't think it a minor revision but a change in direction for the ISSN, perhaps implemented by country maintenance agency creating a patchwork of compliance and a danger to the long time worth of the standard. ____________________________________________________________________________ Modifier's message This ballot was stated incorrectly based on the information given. If you agree with the amendment then vote "yes" If you DO NOT agree with the amendment then vote "no" with your comment. Should you need assistance in changing your vote please don't hesitate to contact me at [4]dparks at niso.org -- DeVonne Parks DeVonne Parks modified the ballot ISO 3297-2007-ISSN Revision Marjorie Hlava [5]mhlava at accessinn.com References 1. mailto:mhlava at accessinn.com 2. mailto:mhlava at accessinn.com 3. mailto:ggrazevich at mla.org 4. mailto:dparks at niso.org 5. mailto:mhlava at accessinn.com From mhlava at accessinn.com Wed Mar 16 13:15:23 2016 From: mhlava at accessinn.com (Marjorie Hlava) Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 11:15:23 -0600 Subject: [Asis-standards] ISO 3297-2007-ISSN Revision In-Reply-To: <1A807E71-D409-45E5-98E8-7C10E268B264@yahoo.com> References: <1A807E71-D409-45E5-98E8-7C10E268B264@yahoo.com> Message-ID: <2DD20741-F04F-4EE1-A35B-70728A7C7B48@accessinn.com> true - so comment again please. I am no longer a voting rep Marjorie Hlava mhlava at accessinn.com > On Mar 16, 2016, at 10:41 AM, Mark Needleman wrote: > > Marjorie > > except they didn?t ask for a vote - only comments > > mark >> On Mar 16, 2016, at 12:34 PM, Marjorie Hlava > wrote: >> >> still looks like a NO vote is the right one to do- I still believe this will cause the ?standard? to be implemented differently in different countries and therefore no longer be a standard >> >> >> Marjorie Hlava >> mhlava at accessinn.com >> >> >> >> >>> On Mar 10, 2016, at 12:00 PM, Gregory Grazevich > wrote: >>> >>> FYI, Margie's comment on the initial ballot was: >>> >>> I have voted Yes - but it is really a NO Vote. My comments as follows >>> >>> This is a confusing vote. Are we voting against the change or voting to put the ballot forward? Or does the vote not matter and this is just a vehicle to collect comments? >>> >>> I don't think it a minor revision but a change in direction for the ISSN, perhaps implemented by country maintenance agency creating a patchwork of compliance and a danger to the long time worth of the standard. >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________________________ >>>> >>>> Modifier's message >>>> This ballot was stated incorrectly based on the information given. If you agree with the amendment then vote "yes" If you DO NOT agree with the amendment then vote "no" with your comment. Should you need assistance in changing your vote please don't hesitate to contact me at dparks at niso.org >>>> -- DeVonne Parks >>>> DeVonne Parks modified the ballot ISO 3297-2007-ISSN Revision >> >> Marjorie Hlava >> mhlava at accessinn.com >> >> >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- true - so comment again please. I am no longer a voting rep Marjorie Hlava [1]mhlava at accessinn.com On Mar 16, 2016, at 10:41 AM, Mark Needleman <[2]needleman_mark at yahoo.com> wrote: Marjorie except they didn?t ask for a vote - only comments mark On Mar 16, 2016, at 12:34 PM, Marjorie Hlava <[3]mhlava at accessinn.com> wrote: still looks like a NO vote is the right one to do- I still believe this will cause the ?standard? to be implemented differently in different countries and therefore no longer be a standard Marjorie Hlava [4]mhlava at accessinn.com On Mar 10, 2016, at 12:00 PM, Gregory Grazevich <[5]ggrazevich at mla.org> wrote: FYI, Margie's comment on the initial ballot was: I have voted Yes - but it is really a NO Vote. My comments as follows This is a confusing vote. Are we voting against the change or voting to put the ballot forward? Or does the vote not matter and this is just a vehicle to collect comments? I don't think it a minor revision but a change in direction for the ISSN, perhaps implemented by country maintenance agency creating a patchwork of compliance and a danger to the long time worth of the standard. ____________________________________________________________________________ Modifier's message This ballot was stated incorrectly based on the information given. If you agree with the amendment then vote "yes" If you DO NOT agree with the amendment then vote "no" with your comment. Should you need assistance in changing your vote please don't hesitate to contact me at [6]dparks at niso.org -- DeVonne Parks DeVonne Parks modified the ballot ISO 3297-2007-ISSN Revision Marjorie Hlava [7]mhlava at accessinn.com References 1. mailto:mhlava at accessinn.com 2. mailto:needleman_mark at yahoo.com 3. mailto:mhlava at accessinn.com 4. mailto:mhlava at accessinn.com 5. mailto:ggrazevich at mla.org 6. mailto:dparks at niso.org 7. mailto:mhlava at accessinn.com