(This issue is raised by me on behalf of Red Hat).
In the JSR Review and Public Review ballots, an EC member will often cast a vote of "Yes" with a conditional clause in the comments section. There should be a formal process for addressing these conditions, perhaps tracked in the same manner as a specification issue.
One proposal is to introduce a "Conditional Yes" option on the ballots. This means the voting EC member agrees with the JSR in principal, but has one or more issues that the voting member would like to see addressed before the next vote. The comment would be converted to a spec issue and would require that it be handled like any other issue (rejection is a possible resolution, provided there is a reason given).
If the issue is not addressed to the voting member's satisfaction, that may translate in a "No" vote. The important part is that the reason for the change is traceable.
This proposed process gives the public a more open view of what the EC views as problems in the spec, or how it relates to other specifications.
The current scrolling text box that is used to display comments is very difficult to read. We would like to propose that each comment is separated into individual blockquote elements, each with a header that includes the name of the voting member. Ideally, those headings would be referencable (with anchor tags).
Additionally, a public Item Exception section in the ballot results page would prevent issues from being forgotten. The new vote type allows for an expression of issues, yet would still allow the vote to be counted as a "Yes" vote toward moving the JSR forward. It's a more formalized way of what's currently being done (either abstaining or voting no and leaving a comment).
This request extends the motivation of the Item Exception Ballot for a Maintenance Review to to JSR Review and Public Review Ballot.