Subject: [dmarc-ietf] Joel Jaeggli's No Objection on charter-ietf-dmarc-00-00: (with COMMENT)

From: "Joel Jaeggli" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2014 22:36:26 -0700

Joel Jaeggli has entered the following ballot position for
charter-ietf-dmarc-00-00: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-dmarc/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

> The existing base specification is being submitted as an Independent
>  Submission to become an Informational RFC.

This implies the action is in the present when in fact the submission
already occured and in the future still will have.

"The existing base specification (draft-kucherawy-dmarc-base) was
submitted as a draft Independent Submission."

I think summarizes what happened.

---

From: Pete Resnick <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 10:24:08 -0500

I can adjust the verb tense in the sentence when I get to other nits. I 
think I prefer "present perfect" for this particular one. :-)

pr

-- 
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478