[CMC] RE : RE : IOAG-12 "Final Acts"

[Adrian J. Hooke]

At 07:33 AM 11/27/2008, Soula Jean-Marc wrote:
>I will be satisfied if you follow Manfred's suggestion on the 
>inclusion of the CNES memo and of the wording of  "One delegation 
>expressed a different view of the priority assigned to the ..."

In such cases where there are internal IOAG disagreements about 
priorities, it would be very useful to have a clear definition about 
what that implies when the IOAG "advises" CCSDS with respect to 
potential needs for future standards.

The IOAG contains only a subset of the CCSDS agencies. Firstly, it 
must be clear that the IOAG cannot *direct* a CCSDS agency to expend 
resources on a standards development if that agency isn't represented 
in the IOAG. Secondly, if the IOAG agency delegates have differing 
views of priorities, then is it understood that the corresponding 
CCSDS agency delegates will each weigh those differences when 
deciding whether or not to allocate their CCSDS resources to a new 
standards development?

Best regards
Adrian

Adrian J. Hooke
Chairman, CCSDS Engineering Steering Group (CESG) and
CCSDS Technical Liaison to the IOAG
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cmc/attachments/20081127/211fbe34/attachment.html