<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [gnso-osc] RE: MOTION REFERRING TO THE GNSO COUNCIL OPERATIONS PROCEDURES WORK TEAM (GCOT) RECOMMENDATIONS
- To: Ray Fassett <ray@xxxxxxxxx>, Philip Sheppard <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [gnso-osc] RE: MOTION REFERRING TO THE GNSO COUNCIL OPERATIONS PROCEDURES WORK TEAM (GCOT) RECOMMENDATIONS
- From: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 15:37:29 +0100
Ray, Philip,
Thanks very much for your responses.
Stéphane
Le 16 nov. 2010 à 15:09, Ray Fassett a écrit :
> This answers it for me. The edits Wolf-Ulrich is correcting to the DOI
> language occurred at the OSC level, not the GCOT level.
>
> Ray
>
> From: owner-gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> Philip Sheppard
> Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 9:07 AM
> To: KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx; ray@xxxxxxxxx; stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx
> Cc: gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx; gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [gnso-osc] RE: MOTION REFERRING TO THE GNSO COUNCIL OPERATIONS
> PROCEDURES WORK TEAM (GCOT) RECOMMENDATIONS
>
> Wolf-Ulrich,
> indeed OSC approval included the revised DOI though to be honest there was
> little discussion about it.
>
> Philip
>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|