Mass Update

This document will be removed from the pipeline until the Intellectual Property issues are resolved. Document will need to be resubmitted in the 
future.

GGF Editor's Quick Tip #1
PUBLIC COMMENT PROCEDURES


Documents are one of the principal outcomes of the Global Grid Forum's
(GGF's) efforts.  This Quick Tip describes the role of public comments
in document publication, and encourages effective public comment
gathering for documents in the publication pipeline.

As part of the publication process for Global Grid Forum (GGF)
documents, all documents receive a 30 or 60 day public comment period.
GGF staff and/or the GGF Editor post such documents to Gridforge
(http://forge.gridforum.org) and announce them to the WG/RG chairs, as
well as linking to the main page of the GGF at http://gridforum.org.

Document authors and/or supporting working group / research group
(WG/RG) chairs should announce new documents to their constituencies
including all WG/RG members (via the mailing list or otherwise).
Other strategies for soliciting input might include seeking feedback
from outside standard groups' membership, from other GGF WG/RG groups,
from selected external reviewers, and others.

Gridforge is used to enter and track public comments, and may be used
by anyone (not necessarily affiliated with GGF WG/RGs).  Gridforge
allows for anonymous posting, and individuals who would rather not use
Gridforge could email comments to WG/RG chairs or directly to the area
director (AD) or GGF Editor.

Public comments on documents are how the GGF community seeks to
validate their documents through external review.  Documents without
public comment might not show sufficient interest or review by
internal and external experts.

** Minimally, the Grid Forum Steering Group (GFSG) and GGF Editor expect
** that all document editors/authors will provide public comments
** reflecting their understanding and support of their document.
** Comments from WG/RG members and others are used as part of the
** measure of a document's readiness for publication, and should be
** sought actively by document editors/authors.

If the public comment period yields a very small number of public
comments, the AD, GFSG or GGF Editor may decide to place a document
back for a further public comment period (30 or 60 days, as
appropriate).

I concur with Olle Mulmo's notes, and will place this document into a 30-day public comment period.  Authors are urged most strongly to seek out 
public comments from WG/RG members of their and other groups, and to make their own comments in the public comment tracker, as well.

Authors/editors: please go ahead with the suggestions that Olle attached.  Make sure to upload an editable format for the next version (post public 
comment): a .doc or .rtf or similar.

For the use of normative language ("SHOULD" etc.), I agree that consistency is needed.  I do not think it is necessary to add more normative language,
 since this is not a standards specification.

Overall, this document looks polished and is well-written.  Other than the comments already here, you can expect some further ideas and suggestions 
during and after public comment.  I expect this document will be ready for publication shortly afterwards.

Notes from my initial review of the document attached.

Status per 10/28 GFSG conference call.  Document is submitted as a CP document.  It's been in process for 6 months or so, but is now submitted.  
Possibly ready for public comment.

They have under-used normative language (SHOULD, MAY, etc.).
Question: should this be added.

Resolution: pass to GBN, decide whether to ask for revisions.  Q:
should this be an informational document, rather than CP?  Q:
should more normative language be used?  GBN will work w/ Olle on this.