[geolang-comment] TC Process RE: [tm-pubsubj-comment] Baltimore minutes

[Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>]

*Bernard
> >It seems to me that GeoLang (idem XMLvoc) has to push proposals, then
> >PubSubj has to
> >review them to see if they fit the general requirements and
> >recommendations, consider the
> >input to make those R&R progress, then push its conclusions, comments
and
> >recommendations
> >to GeoLang to consider. And at some point GeoLang has to comply,
since
> >compliance is in
> >its charter.

*Mary
> Sounds like a good process. It would be good to have this written down
> somewhere. Was this discussed in Baltimore and if so, it would be good
to
> get into the minutes.

It was not discussed explicitly, what I suggest above seems to have been
the implicit process so far. Having it explicited in both TC charters
and guidelines is maybe a good idea, but may result in overhead
administrative burden. It seems to me that so far, things have proceeded
smoothly between the two TCs. If people think this is not the case, then
we have to legifer.

Bernard