Re: Revised Draft

["Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>]

Christopher Ambler writes:
> Perry, I realize that my revised draft isn't the IAHC draft, but your
> comments distress me. What I'm trying to accomplish is the synthesis
> of consensus, using the IAHC draft as a starting point.

I understand that, but as I've noted...

1) As a person with a substantial amount to gain or lose here, you
   probably are not an objective third party capable of judging
   consensus and fulfilling a role as document editor.
2) There really isn't a benefit to having comment on a divergent document
   from the IAHC document, because the document being worked from is
   the IAHC document.  There are lots of groups that have received
   requests for comments, including a number of governmental agencies
   around the world and others. They are going to be commenting on the
   IAHC document, and it is almost certain that any changes that occur
   are going to be based on the IAHC document. Keep in mind that a
   minority of those submitting comments are on this list.
3) An "edited" document isn't nearly as valuable to the IAHC as the
   broad spectrum of opinions being stated here. The reasoning behind
   the opinions is often at least as important if not more so than the
   opinions themselves. Context is lost when an "edited" document is
   submitted -- only a single thread of opinion, stripped of its
   context, ends up being expressed. I doubt that any edited document
   can express the depth and breadth of opinion being expressed here.
4) Discussion of an "edited" unofficial document here is likely to
   engender confusion as to which text is being discussed. Its very
   important that people continue to focus on the given working
   document. Recall that the IAHC is attempting to synthesize a wide
   number of comments from many divergent sources of input, and that
   we are going to have a difficult enough time as it is attempting to
   decide on a final text without attempting to sort through comments
   made on unofficial documents to determine if they are relevent to
   our deliberations on the official document.
5) Finally, for purposes of creating its final document, the IAHC
   already has a document editor. Given the number of sources of input
   the IAHC is receiving, it is unlikely that any document generated
   could be the basis for the final IAHC text, so there isn't much
   point in producing a "finished" text for the IAHC to consume.


Perry
Speaking for myself, and not the IAHC, especially given that most of
the IAHC is gone for the holidays.