Preamble

The following paragraph is not part of the voting rules and just describes the current composition of the EC.

The following discussion describes the rules and procedures to be followed by the IAU FITS Working Group (FWG). These rules have been established by the FWG Executive Committee (EC), which has the right to modify them at any time. The EC also has the authority to determine what procedures are to be followed in any circumstances that are not explicitly covered under the existing rules. The EC currently has 7 voting members consisting of the chair and vice chair (if designated) of the FWG, the previous chair of the FWG, and the chairs of the 4 former regional FITS committees (North America, Europe, Japan, and Australia/New Zealand). The 'Designated FITS Representative' to the Virtual Observatory Working Group (also established by IAU Commission 5) is also a member of the EC. The president of Commission 5 has been traditionally an observer in the EC mailing list. The future composition of the EC will be arranged in such a way to maintain a balance between different geographical areas, disciplinary and wavelength areas, and a representation of major data handling organizations. The EC typically makes decisions on a unanimous consensus basis, but if necessary, a simple majority vote (currently, 4 out of 7 members) may be used to reach a decision.

1. Issues related to the definition of the FITS Standard

Preliminary Activities

Before a proposal that affects or is related to the definition of the FITS Standard is submitted to the FWG for approval, it is generally expected that the proposal will have been previously posted on the fitsbits@nrao.edu moderated mail distribution list for comment from the general FITS community. In some cases an ad hoc special interest group many also be formed, with its own dedicated email discussion forum, to help develop the proposal. Once the EC agrees that these preliminary discussions of the proposal have converged and have resulted in a mature proposal that represents the consensus of a significant majority of the participants, then the proposal may be considered for formal approval.

Public Comment Period

The first step of the official approval process will be a formal public comment and discussion period to take place on the fitsbits@nrao.edu moderated mail distribution list. During this period the members of the FWG, as well as members of the general FITS community, may all offer comments or suggestions regarding the proposal. The originators of the proposal may make modifications to the proposal in response to these comments. This public discussion period will normally last for at least 4 weeks, and the EC may extend it as necessary to allow time for the discussions to reach a conclusion.

EC Review

Once the formal discussion period on fitsbits@nrao.edu has ended then the EC must decide whether to proceed with the next step of the approval process to vote on the proposal. To aid in making this decision, the chair of the FWG will conduct a confidential straw poll of committee members to determine if anyone is not ready to vote on the proposal (e.g., wants to continue the discussion, or will be away during the proposed voting period). The committee members will also be asked whether they are contemplating voting against the proposal, and if so, why. If any 'No' votes are indicated, then the EC will first make every effort to broker a compromise that will satisfy all parties before calling for a vote.

The EC will consider the following factors when deciding whether to call for votes:

• Is the proposal clearly written and technically sound?
• Have sufficient efforts been made to solicit comments on the proposal from other interest groups and the general FITS user community?
• Have all the comments and suggestions that were made during the Public Comment Period been adequately addressed?
• In cases where it is relevant to do so, has a sufficient amount of interoperability testing of the conventions defined within the proposal been demonstrated. The amount of required testing, if any, will depend on the particular proposal, but could, for example, involve independent software implementations running on different types of computer platforms.

These same factors will be considered by the individual members of the FWG when casting their votes for or against the proposal.

Final IAU FWG Vote

The FWG will then conduct a final vote on the proposal.

Before calling for a vote, the chair of the FWG will first conduct a confidential poll of the FWG members. If any of the members are considering a 'No' vote, or if any member actually votes 'No' without previously informing the chair, then the voting process will be suspended for up to 3 months to try to negotiate a compromise that will lead to a unanimous vote in favor of the proposal. This mandatory delay period is designed to ensure that minority opinions are adequately considered and is in keeping with the tradition within the FITS community of striving to reach unanimous consent on important issues. If an acceptable compromise is not achieved within 3 months, then the vote of the FWG may proceed.

The FWG members normally will have 3 weeks to submit their votes (either 'Yes, in favor', 'No, not in favor', or 'Abstain') via email to the FWG chair. A quorum of at least 3/4 of the FWG members must cast a vote (Yes, No, or Abstain) for the vote to be valid. If this quorum is met, then the proposal is approved if at least 3/4 of the votes cast are 'Yes'. As a validation of the voting process, the chair will make available the date and time of any email votes of 'No' or 'Abstain' so that members who did not vote in favor of the proposal can verify that their votes were properly recorded.

Once the voting has been completed, the FWG chair will announce the vote tallies (without associated names) on the fitsbits@nrao.edu moderated mail distribution list. If the proposal is approved by the FWG then it takes effect immediately (unless the proposal itself stipulates a different effective start date) and becomes part of the official standards of the FITS format.

2. Business or Procedural Issues

When the IAU FITS Working Group considers issues that are related to the internal business or procedural workings of the FWG itself, it is not necessary to first hold a public comment period as is required when considering issues related to the FITS Standard. Instead, the issue is discussed/debated by the FWG members on the IAUFWG mail list, and then, if required, the chair will call for a confidential vote on the issue. All members will normally have 3 weeks (unless a different time period is agreed to before the vote) to send their votes of 'Yes', 'No', or 'Abstain' via email to the chair. Normally (unless different voting rules are agreed to prior to the vote) in order for a proposal to be approved by the FWG, a quorum of at least 3/4 of the FWG members must cast a vote (Yes, No, or Abstain). If this quorum is met, then the proposal is approved if at least 3/4 of the votes cast are 'Yes'. The 3-month delay rule in the case of any 'No' votes does not apply in this case when voting on procedural issues. As a validation of the voting process, the chair will make available the date and time of any email votes of 'No' or 'Abstain' so that members who did not vote in favor of the proposal can verify that their votes were properly recorded.