This resolution describes the AIML specification release process. It was approved 3 August 2001 by the Alicebot and AIML Architecture Committee by a vote of 9-0.

1. Each change to the existing current AIML specification shall be considered individually as a unique issue.
2. The release of a new AIML Specification shall be triggered by a single change being approved.
3. Upon the approval of a "single change motion" to the existing AIML Specification, a certain date shall be established for the release. Unless otherwise specified the release date shall be 30 days after the motion passes.
4. Any amendments that have gained approval by the release date shall be included in the specification on the release date.
5. Each new AIML Specification extends the prior AIML Specification. All previously approved elements become automatically deprecated (as defined by this committee) unless otherwise specified.
6. A commitee member may offer a "motion to delay", to extend a release date.

Justification and Commentary (Tom Ringate):

The past experience of voting for a specification that included several changes resulted in several valid issues being abandoned in the effort to get a specification announced. This will result in those issues having to be brought up all over again so they can be resolved. There is no reason that the debate on each issue could not and should not continue outside of the deadline of a specification release date.

The release of a specification has two primary elements: when it is released, and what is in the release. The date of release should be established so people can champion their motions and work for acceptance to meet the release date. However, just because a debate has not reached a conclusion doesn't mean the debate should end, nor should it hold up the release of the current specification. (unless a delay has been called for and approved -- again, this delay in itself needs to be a unique and individual motion to delay).

The chairman and the committee should try to hold the number of active motions to a reasonable number so that proper condiseration can be given to each issue.

It was evident that our previous process was flawed when objections to the release included not one objection but sometimes six or seven objections to different changes.

There is no reason that a new specification could not come out in two months or two years. The timing of a release should be dictated by the need to make a change. It would make sense to consider having a minimum time between releases that we abide by. That would be an acceptable suggested modification to this motion.