<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Cambria;
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
p.Default, li.Default, div.Default
{mso-style-name:Default;
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-autospace:none;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Cambria",serif;
color:black;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>Hi all,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>The 2011 edition of 29500 was the 2008 version with a Technical Corrigendum (COR) and an Amendment (AMD) applied. And the 2012 edition was the 2011 version with a COR applied. Very soon after the CORs and AMD were balloted and accepted, a new edition was produce as a consolidated reprint, which meant that the CORs and AMD were never actually published individually. No FDIS was produced or balloted. As this approach had worked for the previous two new editions, we assumed we could do the same again this time. However, we have now been informed that the alignment of JTC 1 Directives with ISO/IEC Directives, we must now hold a 2-month FDIS ballot as well (which runs at the ISO/ISO level, not just SC 34 or JTC 1).<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>An FDIS ballot allows positive, negative, or abstention votes. Positive votes CANNOT include comments and CANNOT be conditional on certain changes being made. A negative vote CAN be supported by comments, but need not. Abstentions are excluded when the votes are counted, <b>as well as negative votes NOT accompanied by technical reasons</b>. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><b>Technical reasons for negative votes are submitted to the technical committee or subcommittee secretariat for consideration at the time of the next review of the International Standard.</b><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>So the good news is that there CANNOT be a Ballot Resolution Meeting (BRM)!<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Our current plan is to very soon ballot another COR for each of Parts 1 and 4, and then fold those into the base documents along with the changes from COR3 to produce a consolidated edition. Now we’ll have to send that out for an FDIS. If things go smoothly, we might just about be able to make all that happen before the end of December 2016.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Regards,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Rex<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>