Public comment period · §3
Draft scope of the analytical and methodological standards… — disposition
The disposition of every submission and the amendments that resulted.
§3Disposition and amendments
§3.1Disposition table
Table 1. Every submission with its disposition. Each row links to the submission in full.
| Reference | Respondent | Point raised | Disposition |
|---|---|---|---|
| DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/001 | Dr Rosalind Petrossian | A printed copy loses the document identifier | Accepted |
| DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/002 | Dr Hyacinth Drakeford-Amadi | A printed copy loses the information that makes it checkable | Accepted |
| DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/003 | Eamon Sandringham-Adu | References should carry a persistent identifier for every cited source | Accepted in part |
| DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/004 | Amara Vandergraaf | Defined terms are defined in a glossary the reader has to know exists | Accepted in part |
| DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/005 | Quentin Whitmarsh-Obi | The registry is published only as pages and not in a form that can be processed | Accepted |
| DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/006 | Yolanda Norrington-Bhatt | A figure carries information that appears nowhere in text | Accepted |
| DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/007 | Thaddeus Isaksen-Balogun | The same quantity is rounded differently in two parts of one document | Accepted |
| DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/008 | Dr Anselm Thorsby-Nakamura | A field the Institute could not verify should be shown rather than omitted | Accepted |
| DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/009 | Dr Marisol Dunmore-Ekpo | An index organised by certainty invites comparison between ratings that are not comparable | Accepted in part |
| 9 submissions in total. | |||
§3.2Summary by disposition
Table 2. Counts by disposition, with the meaning of each.
| Disposition | Count | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| Accepted | 6 | The submission is accepted and the draft is amended as proposed. The amendment is recorded in the amendment log of the document it changed and is traceable to the numbered submission. |
| Accepted in part | 3 | Part of the submission is accepted and part is not. The secretariat response states which part is which and on what ground the remainder was declined. |
| Noted, no amendment | 0 | The submission raises a point the Institute accepts but that does not require a change to the draft, most often because the draft already states it elsewhere. The location is given in the response. |
| Not accepted | 0 | The submission is not accepted. The secretariat response gives the reason. A submission that is not accepted remains published in full; the Institute does not remove a submission because it disagrees with it. |
§3.3Resulting amendments
- A printed copy loses the document identifier — arising from DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/001. The print stylesheet now carries the document identifier, the version, the publication date and the address in a footer on every printed page.
- A printed copy loses the information that makes it checkable — arising from DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/002. The print stylesheet now carries the identifier, version, publication date and retrieval date on every page, expands link destinations into the text, and prints the full reference list rather than a link to it.
- References should carry a persistent identifier for every cited source — arising from DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/003. Every reference without a persistent identifier now carries an explicit statement that the identifier is not held by the Institute, so that its absence is a recorded fact rather than an apparent oversight.
- Defined terms are defined in a glossary the reader has to know exists — arising from DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/004. Defined terms are linked at first use in each document. Linking every occurrence was rejected because a page in which a third of the words are links is harder to read than one in which none are.
- The registry is published only as pages and not in a form that can be processed — arising from DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/005. The registry fields are now emitted in a structured form alongside the rendered pages, carrying the identifier, series, type, version, dates, certainty rating and status for every document, and the structured record is regenerated with the site so that it…
- A figure carries information that appears nowhere in text — arising from DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/006. Every figure in the series now restates its data in the caption or in an accompanying table, and no quantity appears only in a figure.
- The same quantity is rounded differently in two parts of one document — arising from DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/007. Quantities are now rounded once, at computation, and displayed identically wherever they appear. The convention is stated in the series description.
- A field the Institute could not verify should be shown rather than omitted — arising from DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/008. Every field now carries one of four states, being verified, claimed and unverified, sought and not established, or not applicable, and the state is displayed rather than inferred from an empty cell.
- An index organised by certainty invites comparison between ratings that are not comparable — arising from DRAFT-ANALYTICAL-S/009. The index is now grouped by domain with certainty as the ordering within each group, and a standing statement records that ratings in different domains are not directly comparable and states why.
References cited on this page
References are numbered in order of first citation in this document. Each superscript in the text links to its entry below.
- International Organization for Standardization. ISO/IEC 17025:2017 General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories. ISO/IEC Standard 2017;3rd edition. identifier not held by the Institute
Identifiers are reproduced only where the Institute holds them. Where a digital object identifier or PubMed identifier is not shown, the Institute has recorded the journal and year and has not constructed an identifier.
Compound Evidence Institute · CEI-CP-015/3 · https://compoundevidence.com/comment-periods/draft-analytical-series-scope/disposition/ · retrieved 30 July 2026