Re: Issue: CLOS-CONDITIONS (Version 3)

[Dan L. Pierson <pierson@mist.encore.com>]

    I favor CLOS-CONDITIONS:YES-OPTION-B, even though it's more
    verbose, because it makes for a more consistent language.
    I don't think the compatibility issue is important since we're
    only talking about being compatible with a prototype that some
    people have used, not being compatible with a widely used
    standard.  Essentially, I agree with JonL's comment of 9 Feb.
    
Even though I personally prefer the aesthetics of YES-OPTION-A, JonL
and Gregor have made a very strong case for YES-OPTION-B so I now
support it instead.

    Would it make sense to offer only YES-OPTION-B to the whole
    X3J13 committee, in order to limit the length of the discussion?
    Or is that excessively Fascist?
    
The comments I got from non-cleanup members at Kuaui were that cleanup
should be making more decisions and giving more guidance.  Some even
went to far as to say we had done a poor job because we didn't have an
explicit recomendation from cleanup attached to every issue.

Let's just present YES-OPTION-B and concentrate on dealing with more
difficult objections such as Thom Linden's (the policy of
CLOSification must be decided in general before voting in any piece of
it).