Hi Robin,
thanks for the clarification. Two remarks/questions below.
On 03.03.2011 15:24, Robin Cover wrote:
It's possible that comments/feedback from any source might
be out of order, being irrelevant or not within the scope
of changes made in the previous review. That determination
will be made by the TC Members, who need to create a
disposition on potentially several levels, including the
question of relevance (e.g., being in scope).
Okay, but how do we handle those comments that aren't in scope. Do we
omit them in the disposition report? Or do we just list them as "out of
scope"? If we would include them with a disposition, then it seems to
me that the limitation of the scope of a public review would not have
an effect any longer.
I think we generally receive comments, and some are in scope, and some
are
not. But whether any comment triggers the 7-day delay, or whether only
"in scope" comments trigger that, is not clear to me. I think "any"
could
refer to "in scope" and "out of scope" comments. But I could be
wrong...
I think you are correct: "any comments" means "any comments".
Okay. With the reasoning you provided that makes sense.
Best regards
Michael
--
Michael Brauer | Oracle Office Development
Phone: +49 40 23646 500
Oracle Office Global Business Unit
ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | Nagelsweg 55 | 20097 Hamburg
ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG
Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 München
Registergericht: Amtsgericht München, HRA 95603
Komplementärin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V.
Rijnzathe 6, 3454PV De Meern, Niederlande
Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697
Geschäftsführer: Jürgen Kunz, Marcel van de Molen, Alexander van der Ven
Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that
help protect the environment
