RE: [gnso-trans-wg] "Beefed up" deletes section
Hi again all, Proof-reading the clean version myself, I realize it is not entirely clean - there is an earlier comment from Chuck still hanging in there and need for a microscopic edit in the deletes section for the second part of 15. Please replace with the attached "cleanclean" version. For the rest, I think it looks mighty good... Best regards Olof -----Original Message----- From: owner-gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Olof Nordling Sent: den 14 mars 2008 18:09 To: Gomes, Chuck; Thomas Keller; gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx Subject: RE: [gnso-trans-wg] "Beefed up" deletes section Chuck and all, Of course! Here goes, see attached, a consolidated version, both redline and clean (the markup version suffers a bit from concatenated changes, so I recommend proof-reading the clean one). Best regards (and have a nice weekend!) Olof -----Original Message----- From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: den 14 mars 2008 14:24 To: Thomas Keller; Olof Nordling; gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx Subject: RE: [gnso-trans-wg] "Beefed up" deletes section Thanks Tom. Olof - can you make the change in your document and then add your document to mine to create a new version for discussion on the list? Chuck -----Original Message----- From: Thomas Keller [mailto:tom@xxxxxxxx] Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 4:39 AM To: Gomes, Chuck; 'Olof Nordling'; gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx Subject: AW: [gnso-trans-wg] "Beefed up" deletes section Hi Chuck, I'm fine with the proposed language. Best, tom -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: owner-gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von Gomes, Chuck Gesendet: Donnerstag, 13. März 2008 20:45 An: Olof Nordling; gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx Betreff: RE: [gnso-trans-wg] "Beefed up" deletes section The changes Olof made look good to me. In addition I support Tom's suggestion for beefing up the notes for deleting the second part of issue 15. I believe that Tom was referring to the work of the original IRTP task force; if I am correct, then I took a crack at beefing it up as shown in the attached file. Tom - Does what I did beef it up as you suggested? Is it accurate? All - Please comment as well. Thanks, Chuck > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx > [mailto:owner-gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Olof Nordling > Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 4:55 PM > To: gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx > Subject: [gnso-trans-wg] "Beefed up" deletes section > > Dear all, > Attached is my attempt to "beef up" our deletes section, with changes > shown as mark-up. I have essentially elaborated a little on our > reasoning without stretching the substance much further. Enough? Too > much? Too little? Foot faults? - Well, please comment. > > Best regards > > Olof > > PS. As to "CT", my preliminary finding is that it is indeed a misprint > for "Consensus Ranking", which is the term used for these values in > Ross' group's final document to the Council. > I'm inclined to suggest replacing "CT" by "Consensus Ranking", spelled > out. > > Attachment:
Transfer WG Recommendations for PDP Groupings - 14 Mar 08 Draft cleanclean.doc
|