[CPN] Fwd: CPN action needed on species proposal

[David Marjanovic]

>> I think the plan was to send the authors our comments after we agree 
>> on wording for the modifications of the code that stemmed from the 
>> CBM proposal (see the last paragraph in Dave Tank's Aug. 25 message). 
>>  I hope we can move this along quickly now.  Dave's deadline for 
>> responding with general categories of changes was Sept. 3.  I suggest 
>> that we can finish with this matter most quickly by proceeding as 
>> follows:
>> 1) Give committee members one week to speak up if any of us disagrees 
>> that a certain change or kind of change (not the specific wording) 
>> would be worthwhile.
>> 2) For those changes where there is no disagreement, I am willing to 
>> take the lead in framing specific wording in consultation with Kevin. 
>>  Then we will submit our suggested wording to the CPN for discussion, 
>> possible modification, and a vote.  These should probably be 
>> discussed and voted on one by one, as Kevin Padian suggested, but 
>> let's try to limit ourselves to no more than a week for each, 
>> preferably less, as I don't think most of them will be controversial.
>> 3) For the suggested categories of change where there is disagreement 
>> within the CPN, why don't we give ourselves a few days to express our 
>> views and then vote on whether to turn them over to me and Kevin to 
>> draft wording or leave them as currently worded in the code.  This 
>> can be done simultaneously with step 2 since step 2 does not involve 
>> the whole CPN.

That's all fine.

>> If anyone has an alternative idea of how to proceed, please say so 
>> soon; let's keep things moving along.
>>
>> I am aware of the following kinds of changes that have been proposed:
>> 1) Broadening the definition of species in the glossary and elsewhere 
>> in the code.
>> 2) Simplify and improve Art. 21, as proposed by David M. and others.
>> 3) Modify the Preamble along the lines suggested by CBM.
>> 4) Delete Note 3.1.1 and consider merging Note 3.1.2 with Art. 3.1
>> 5) Reword Art. 9.7 (see my Aug. 27 message for details)
>> 6) Reword Rec. 9c (see my Aug. 27 message for details)
>> 7) Delete Rec. 11.4B
>>
>> Did I miss any?

I don't think you have.

>> The only one of these for which disagreement has been expressed to 
>> date is number 7, which David M. disagrees with.  How about items 1 
>> through 6?  Does anyone disagree that it is worthwhile for Kevin and 
>> me to draw up specific wording on these for the CPN to consider?  I 
>> suggest that we set ourselves a deadline of Sunday, Sept. 16 for CPN 
>> members who disagree with any of these changes to say so.   Is this 
>> procedure OK with everyone?  It would be good to hear from at least 
>> Dave, as CPN chair, but I hope everyone will feel free to suggest an 
>> alternative way to proceed if you are uncomfortable with my suggestions.

I'm fine with this, and with items 1 through 6.